| From: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |
| Date: | 2021-01-28 17:41:33 |
| Message-ID: | E43A0AF5-C8D8-44EB-A2A0-3812D0471A48@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 9:13 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I like 0007 quite a bit and am inclined to commit it soon, as it
> doesn't depend on the earlier patches. But:
>
> - I think the residual comment in processSQLNamePattern beginning with
> "Note:" could use some wordsmithing to account for the new structure
> of things -- maybe just "this pass" -> "this function".
> - I suggest changing initializations like maxbuf = buf + 2 to maxbuf =
> &buf[2] for clarity.
Ok, I should be able to get you an updated version of 0007 with those changes here soon for you to commit.
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-01-28 17:49:17 | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-01-28 17:40:13 | Re: new heapcheck contrib module |