Thread: refactor some protocol message sending in walsender and basebackup

Some places in walsender.c and basebackup_copy.c open-code the sending 
of RowDescription and DataRow protocol messages.  But there are already 
more compact and robust solutions available for this, using 
DestRemoteSimple and associated machinery, already in use in walsender.c.

The attached patches 0001 and 0002 are tiny bug fixes I found during this.

Patches 0003 and 0004 are the main refactorings.  They should probably 
be combined into one patch eventually, but this way the treatment of 
RowDescription and DataRow is presented separately.

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 04:36:36PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Some places in walsender.c and basebackup_copy.c open-code the sending of
> RowDescription and DataRow protocol messages.  But there are already more
> compact and robust solutions available for this, using DestRemoteSimple and
> associated machinery, already in use in walsender.c.
> 
> The attached patches 0001 and 0002 are tiny bug fixes I found during this.
> 
> Patches 0003 and 0004 are the main refactorings.  They should probably be
> combined into one patch eventually, but this way the treatment of
> RowDescription and DataRow is presented separately.

All 4 patches look reasonable to me.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

On 01.07.22 23:36, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 04:36:36PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Some places in walsender.c and basebackup_copy.c open-code the sending of
>> RowDescription and DataRow protocol messages.  But there are already more
>> compact and robust solutions available for this, using DestRemoteSimple and
>> associated machinery, already in use in walsender.c.
>>
>> The attached patches 0001 and 0002 are tiny bug fixes I found during this.
>>
>> Patches 0003 and 0004 are the main refactorings.  They should probably be
>> combined into one patch eventually, but this way the treatment of
>> RowDescription and DataRow is presented separately.
> 
> All 4 patches look reasonable to me.

All committed now, thanks.

(I cleaned up the 0004 patch a bit more; there was some junk left in the 
posted patch.)