| From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | gkokolatos(at)pm(dot)me |
| Cc: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, "shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Rachel Heaton <rachelmheaton(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump |
| Date: | 2023-03-20 20:48:58 |
| Message-ID: | 5d7f6a45-f895-a16f-b506-3e3a1998334c@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I was preparing to get the 3 cleanup patches pushed, so I
updated/reworded the commit messages a bit (attached, please check).
But I noticed the commit message for 0001 said:
In passing save the appropriate errno in LZ4File_open_write in
case that the caller is not using the API's get_error_func.
I think that's far too low-level for a commit message, it'd be much more
appropriate for a comment at the function.
However, do we even need this behavior? I was looking for code calling
this function without using get_error_func(), but no luck. And if there
is such caller, shouldn't we fix it to use get_error_func()?
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-Improve-type-handling-in-pg_dump-s-compress-file-.patch | text/x-patch | 25.0 KB |
| v4-0002-Unify-buffer-sizes-in-pg_dump-compression-API.patch | text/x-patch | 6.7 KB |
| v4-0003-Minor-comment-improvements-for-compress_lz4.patch | text/x-patch | 3.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2023-03-20 21:41:12 | Re: [BUG] pg_stat_statements and extended query protocol |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2023-03-20 20:41:36 | Adjust Memoize hit_ratio calculation |