Re: Proposal: GetOldestXminExtend for ignoring arbitrary vacuum flags

Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 2/14/17 3:13 AM, Seki, Eiji wrote:
> > +extern TransactionId GetOldestXmin(Relation rel, uint8
> > ignoreFlags);
>
> My impression is that most other places that do this sort of thing just call the argument 'flags', so as not to "lock in" a single idea of what the flags are for. I can't readily think of another use for flags in GetOldestXmin, but ISTM it's better to just go with "flags" instead of "ignoreFlags".

Thanks. I also think "flags" is better. I will rename it.

But I wonder if I should rename the defined flag names, IGNORE_A_FLAG_XXX and IGNORE_FLAGS_XXX because they include "IGNORE" in their name. I'm concerned GetOldestXmin users are difficult to know the meaning if they have general names, and general names will conflict to other definitions. Would you let me know if you have any idea?

--
Regards,
Eiji Seki
Fujitsu