| From: | wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steven Niu <niushiji(at)gmail(dot)com>, Xiaoran Wang <fanfuxiaoran(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Refactor: Extract XLogRecord info |
| Date: | 2025-06-10 08:00:29 |
| Message-ID: | CAGjGUA+48XRJqWr9yJ1oT4t=3=sdBvwqXQTqO-Cjn19uNg5eEw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
HI
> FWIW, I'm not sure what's the benefit of the proposal which comes down
> to the removal of a bitwise NOT, except more code conflicts with back
> branches.
Agree
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 3:37 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 10:54:43PM -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> > The refactoring LGTM but do we really need two patches? IMHO you can just
> > merge everything into a single patch.
>
> FWIW, I'm not sure what's the benefit of the proposal which comes down
> to the removal of a bitwise NOT, except more code conflicts with back
> branches.
> --
> Michael
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2025-06-10 08:02:04 | Re: [WIP]Vertical Clustered Index (columnar store extension) - take2 |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-06-10 07:37:23 | Re: [PATCH] Refactor: Extract XLogRecord info |