From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Refactor xlog.c #1 - startup.c |
Date: | 2011-11-02 13:44:13 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEz7DadjXyfUnF23Tq5XG_RivkBv7S507mjJ81HUnmi4hA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 14:33, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:44 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Patch removes stuff related to "startup process" and creates files
>>> under src/$DIR/postmaster for this code.
>>>
>>> This makes startup process look more like bgwriter, walwriter etc..
>>
>> In general, +1.
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
>> But I don't think we want duplicate function prototypes for the same
>> functions, so -1 for this hunk:
>>
>> + /* in xlog.c */
>> + extern void WakeupRecovery(void);
>> + extern void StartupXLOG(void);
>>
>> The existing prototypes in xlog.h seem like they should be just fine.
>
> That was to avoid having startup.c include xlog.h, which it doesn't
> really need to see.
Double prototypes seems to me like it's a cure worse than the disease to me...
> Not worried either way, so I'll do as you suggest.
+1.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-11-02 13:56:07 | Re: Thoughts on "SELECT * EXCLUDING (...) FROM ..."? |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-11-02 13:33:51 | Re: Refactor xlog.c #1 - startup.c |