From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Show various offset arrays for heap WAL records |
Date: | 2023-07-11 05:29:17 |
Message-ID: | CAH2-WzkVA1a5WOjUiFwj7zXH05364c3Lbze91j4YQ+9iwxjA6A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 12:44 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> This is still listed in the July commitfest; is there some work remaining?
I don't think so; not in the scope of the original patch series from
Melanie, at least.
> You moved the comment from rmgrdesc_utils.c into rmgrdesc_utils.h, but I
> don't think that was a good idea. Our usual convention is to have the
> function comment in the .c file, not at the declaration in the header
> file. When I want to know what a function does, I jump to the .c file,
> and might miss the comment in the header entirely.
I think that this was a gray area. It wasn't particularly obvious
where this would go. At least not to me.
> Let's add a src/backend/access/rmgrdesc/README file. We don't currently
> have any explanation anywhere why the rmgr desc functions are in a
> separate directory. The README would be a good place to explain that,
> and to have the formatting guidelines. See attached.
I agree that it's better this way, though.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey Lepikhov | 2023-07-11 05:29:29 | Re: Generating code for query jumbling through gen_node_support.pl |
Previous Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2023-07-11 05:17:04 | RE: [Patch] Use *other* indexes on the subscriber when REPLICA IDENTITY is FULL |