> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:16 PM Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> During the discussion in [1] an idea about refactoring ArchiveEntry was
> suggested. The reason is that currently this function has significant number
> of
> arguments that are "optional", and every change that has to deal with it
> introduces a lot of useless diffs. In the thread, mentioned above, such an
> example is tracking current table access method, and I guess "Remove WITH
> OIDS"
> commit 578b229718e is also similar.
>
> Proposed idea is to refactor out all/optional arguments into a separate data
> structure, so that adding/removing a new argument wouldn't change that much of
> unrelated code. Then for every invocation of ArchiveEntry this structure needs
> to be prepared before the call, or as Andres suggested:
>
> ArchiveEntry((ArchiveArgs){.tablespace = 3,
> .dumpFn = somefunc,
> ...});
>
> Another suggestion from Amit is to have an ArchiveEntry() function with
> limited
> number of parameters, and an ArchiveEntryEx() with those extra parameters
> which
> are not needed in usual cases.
>
> I want to prepare a patch for that, and I'm inclined to go with the first
> option, but since there are two solutions to choose from, I would love to hear
> more opinion about this topic. Any pros/cons we don't see yet?
>
> [1]:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20180703070645.wchpu5muyto5n647%40alap3.anarazel.de
[CC Andres and Amit]
