Re: language cleanups in code and docs

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: language cleanups in code and docs
Date: 2021-01-04 23:42:10
Message-ID: CA+hUKGLm_7gnvY9wU+qOmi=ub+mWsdhkdH9tEwu_X5yBe+-vOg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 4:10 AM Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 11:23 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hmm, can we find a more descriptive name for this mechanism? What
> > about calling it the "uncommitted enum table"? See attached.
>
> Thanks for picking this one up again!
>
> Agreed, that's a much better choice.
>
> The term itself is a bit of a mouthful, but it does describe what it
> is in a much more clear way than what the old term did anyway.
>
> Maybe consider just calling it "uncomitted enums", which would as a
> bonus have it not end up talking about uncommittedenumtablespace which
> gets hits on searches for tablespace.. Though I'm not sure that's
> important.
>
> I'm +1 to the change with or without that adjustment.

Cool. I went with your suggestion.

> As for the code, I note that:
> + /* Set up the enum table if not already done in this transaction */
>
> forgets to say it's *uncomitted* enum table -- which is the important
> part of I believe.

Fixed.

> And
> + * Test if the given enum value is in the table of blocked enums.
>
> should probably talk about uncommitted rather than blocked?

Fixed.

And pushed.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2021-01-04 23:45:57 Re: [PATCH] Simple progress reporting for COPY command
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2021-01-04 23:18:07 Re: Online checksums patch - once again