Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT

From: Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT
Date: 2019-02-04 09:25:39
Message-ID: CALAY4q_zMez786wQyBzYzKOx22CQB4mBHGuyN2HOmQebw5Z8jA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 11:26 AM Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:

>
> Hello David,
>
> > Wondering if you have anything else here? I'm happy for the v13
> > version to be marked as ready for committer.
>
> I still have a few comments.
>
> Patch applies cleanly, compiles, global & local make check are ok.
>
> Typos and style in the doc:
>
> "However, since, by default this option generates ..."
> "However, since this option, by default, generates ..."
>
> I'd suggest a more straightforward to my mind and ear: "However, since by
> default the option generates ..., ....", although beware that I'm not a
> native English speaker.
>
>
fixed

I'd suggest not to rely on "atoi" because it does not check the argument
> syntax, so basically anything is accepted, eg "1O" is 1;
>

i change it to strtol

>
> On "if (!dopt->do_nothing) $1 else $2;", I'd rather use a straight
> condition "if (dopt->do_nothing) $2 else $1;" (two instances).
>

fixed

regards
Surafel

Attachment Content-Type Size
pg_dump-rows-per-insert-option_v14.patch text/x-patch 15.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2019-02-04 09:40:07 Re: Using POPCNT and other advanced bit manipulation instructions
Previous Message Laurenz Albe 2019-02-04 09:19:53 Re: What happens if checkpoint haven't completed until the next checkpoint interval or max_wal_size?