Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:11:06AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2019-Sep-16, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:46:16AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Okay, using two separate columns leads to the attached. Any thoughts?
>> This also includes a fix for cases with IS_LOCKED_ONLY and UPGRADED.
>
> I like how it looks in the expected test output. Didn't review the code
> closely, but it looks reasonable in a quick glance.

Thanks for the review.

> Whitespace nitpick: pgindent will do something very annoying with
> this:
>
>> + PG_RETURN_DATUM(
>> + HeapTupleGetDatum(heap_form_tuple(tupdesc, values, nulls)));
>
> I suggest to split the line in the first comma, not in the parens.

Indeed. I am switching to use a HeapTuple as intermediate step
instead.

>> + Combined flags include for example <literal>HEAP_XMIN_FROZEN</literal>
>> + which is defined as a set of <literal>HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED</literal>
>> + and <literal>HEAP_XMIN_INVALID</literal>.
>
> I suggest something like "Combined flags are displayed for source-level
> macros that take into account the value of more than one raw bit, such
> as HEAP_XMIN_FROZEN". (We probably don't want an exhaustive list, which
> becomes annoying to maintain; users can refer to the source file.)

Yes, I didn't want to provide a list for that exact reason, and your
suggestion of change sounds fine to me.

> There's a typo "bites" in a comment.

Thanks, fixed.

Amit, what do you think? Does the patch match with what you have in
mind?
--
Michael