Re:[PATCH] Little refactoring of portalcmds.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zizhuan Liu
Subject Re:[PATCH] Little refactoring of portalcmds.c
Date
Msg-id tencent_149BDBB2851AA69104BEAC8D84566722F005@qq.com
Whole thread
In response to [PATCH] Little refactoring of portalcmds.c  (Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@tigerdata.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Little refactoring of portalcmds.c
List pgsql-hackers
Hi all,

I have reviewed patch 6113 on CommitFest.
CommitFest page: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6113/

The newly introduced check_cursor_name() implements the logic to reject empty cursor names, which matches the existing checks in PerformCursorOpen() and PerformPortalFetch().

However, this helper function is not a good fit for PerformPortalClose(). At the start of this function, there is a check for name == NULL — a NULL name corresponds to the CLOSE ALL command — and this check runs prior to validating whether the name is an empty string.

While calling check_cursor_name() inside PerformPortalClose() would keep the current behavior intact, it could confuse future readers. This approach also fails to achieve truly consistent cursor name validation across all three functions, and may add extra maintenance burdens in the long term.

On the other hand, if we only refactor PerformCursorOpen() and PerformPortalFetch(), the change would end up being rather minimal.

Considering all these factors, I'd suggest leaving the code as it is.

(Sorry, I tried but still cannot post this to the original thread.)


Thanks,
--
X-MAN (Zizhuan Liu) 
44973863@QQ.COM

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Japin Li
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_rewind does not rewind diverging timelines
Next
From: Chao Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoid leaking system path from pg_available_extensions