Re: dblink patches for comment

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: dblink patches for comment
Date: 2009-06-02 01:09:54
Message-ID: 29955.1243904994@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Probably better if I break this up in logical chunks too. This patch
> only addresses the refactoring you requested here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/28719.1230996378@sss.pgh.pa.us

This looks sane to me in a quick once-over, though I've not tested it.

A small suggestion for future patches: don't bother to reindent code
chunks that aren't changing --- it just complicates the diff with a
lot of uninteresting whitespace changes. You can either do that after
review, or leave it to be done by pgindent. (Speaking of which, we
need to schedule that soon...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2009-06-02 01:14:13 Re: pg_standby -l might destory the archived file
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-06-02 01:00:43 Re: pg_standby -l might destory the archived file