From: | "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <a(dot)melnikov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | daniel(at)yesql(dot)se, peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Use XLOG_CONTROL_FILE macro everywhere? |
Date: | 2024-09-07 07:38:06 |
Message-ID: | a131bf48-6d62-4b67-87e4-ff2c069350b2@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.09.2024 11:09, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Instead, I'd like to propose separating the file and
> path-related definitions from xlog_internal.h, as shown in the
> attached first patch. This change would allow some modules to include
> files without unnecessary details.
>
> The second file is your patch, adjusted based on the first patch.
>
> I’d appreciate hearing from others on whether they find the first
> patch worthwhile. If it’s not considered worthwhile, then I believe
> having postmaster include xlog_internal.h would be the best approach.
I really liked the idea of extracting only the necessary and logically
complete part from xlog_internal.h.
But now the presence of macros related to the segment sizes
in the xlogfilepaths.h seems does not correspond to its name.
So i suggest further extract size-related definition and macros from
xlogfilepaths.h to xlogfilesize.h.
Here is a patch that tries to do this based on the your first patch.
Would be glad to hear your opinion.
With the best wishes,
--
Anton A. Melnikov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Extract-size-related-macros-to-separate-header.patch | text/x-patch | 6.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hunaid Sohail | 2024-09-07 09:24:23 | Re: [PATCH] Add roman support for to_number function |
Previous Message | Maxim Orlov | 2024-09-07 04:36:52 | Re: POC: make mxidoff 64 bits |