Re: [PATCH] ternary reloption type

From: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan(at)nataraj(dot)su>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Timur Magomedov <t(dot)magomedov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan(at)nataraj(dot)su>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ternary reloption type
Date: 2025-09-04 17:07:00
Message-ID: 11330814.CDJkKcVGEf@thinkpad-pgpro
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

My English is bad :-(

It is either trinary, or ternary, but not what I've written in previous
message.

Thanks to Timur for pointing to this issue.

Here goes a new version of the patch with proper naming for an new option
type.

--
Nikolay Shaplov aka Nataraj
Fuzzing Engineer at Postgres Professional
Matrix IM: @dhyan:nataraj.su

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-Add-ternary-reloption-type.patch text/x-patch 4.8 KB
v2-0002-Introduce-ternary-reloptions.patch text/x-patch 11.7 KB
v2-0003-Add-alias-to-be-used-as-unset-state.patch text/x-patch 12.0 KB
v2-0004-Extra-tests.patch text/x-patch 12.3 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ranier Vilela 2025-09-04 17:07:15 Re: PgStat_HashKey padding issue when passed by reference
Previous Message Andres Freund 2025-09-04 16:59:08 Re: [PATCH] Let's get rid of the freelist and the buffer_strategy_lock