| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Avoid unecessary MemSet call (src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c) |
| Date: | 2022-08-25 11:07:26 |
| Message-ID: | YwdX7m4XDI6F8WXi@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 10:38:41AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It changes code. Any bugfix in the surrounding code would have to fix a
> conflict. That is nonzero effort. Is it a huge risk? No, it is very
> small risk and a very small cost to fix such a conflict; but my claim is
> that this change has zero benefit, therefore we should not incur a
> nonzero future effort.
Agreed to leave things as they are. This really comes down to if we
want to make this code more C99-ish or not, and the post-patch result
is logically the same as the pre-patch result.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-08-25 11:32:33 | Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-08-25 11:04:15 | Re: pg_receivewal and SIGTERM |