Re: Is the XLP_BKP_REMOVABLE flag itself removable/obsolete?

From: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Is the XLP_BKP_REMOVABLE flag itself removable/obsolete?
Date: 2026-03-02 13:08:59
Message-ID: CAEze2WhJThcajjanXoQGC3BuAGqkcSeLZMZL6z+6OZp+oHDbng@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2 Mar 2026 at 06:20, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 08:15:22AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Let's just remove this flag. I would have let XLP_ALL_FLAGS as it is
> > now at 0x000F, though. It is just used for filtering the bits we
> > allow to exist in this area of the header, for validation. Perhaps
> > some forks like this extensibility if they have their own extra custom
> > bits, meaning less code to modify. That's a minor point for sure, but
> > people like hacking on Postgres and forking this code.
>
> Done. The patch missed a variable declaration not required anymore in
> AdvanceXLInsertBuffer(), that I have caught with a compiler warning.

Thanks for the check, clean up, and commit!

Kind regards,

Matthias van de Meent
Databricks (https://www.databricks.com)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2026-03-02 13:18:31 Re: index prefetching
Previous Message VASUKI M 2026-03-02 13:02:55 Re: [PATCH] psql: tab completion for ALTER ROLE ... IN DATABASE ...