Re: [PATCH] Refactor: Extract XLogRecord info

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Steven Niu <niushiji(at)gmail(dot)com>, Xiaoran Wang <fanfuxiaoran(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactor: Extract XLogRecord info
Date: 2025-06-10 07:37:23
Message-ID: aEfgs1rHM8XX5HeS@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 10:54:43PM -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> The refactoring LGTM but do we really need two patches? IMHO you can just
> merge everything into a single patch.

FWIW, I'm not sure what's the benefit of the proposal which comes down
to the removal of a bitwise NOT, except more code conflicts with back
branches.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message wenhui qiu 2025-06-10 08:00:29 Re: [PATCH] Refactor: Extract XLogRecord info
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-06-10 07:30:18 Re: [PATCH] PGSERVICEFILE as part of a normal connection string