| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shawn Debnath <sdn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue |
| Date: | 2019-03-07 07:11:51 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGJ_VpGoT54=A4SCAPOFJ0Q+S5oTFNRL+HZzC-E_djCdrw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 6:16 AM Shawn Debnath <sdn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 11:53:16AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > > Why do we need to include fmgr.h in md.h?
> >
> > More generally, any massive increase in an include file's inclusions
> > is probably a sign that you need to refactor. Cross-header inclusions
> > are best avoided altogether if you can --- obviously that's not always
> > possible, but we should minimize them. We've had some very unfortunate
> > problems in the past from indiscriminate #includes in headers.
>
> Agree - I do pay attention to these, but this one slipped through the
> cracks (copied smgr.h then edited to remove smgr bits). Thanks for
> catching this, will fix in the next patch iteration.
Huh... so why it was in smgr.h then? Seems bogus. Fix pushed to master.
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rushabh Lathia | 2019-03-07 07:17:50 | Re: ECPG regression with DECLARE STATEMENT support |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2019-03-07 07:03:27 | Re: Re: proposal: plpgsql pragma statement |