| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Use LOCKMODE in parse_relation.c/.h |
| Date: | 2026-02-23 20:26:29 |
| Message-ID: | af3412e9-f9f7-4032-8c29-8a97e151534d@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 19.02.26 10:03, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 3:20 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>> There are a couple of comments in parse_relation.c
>>
>> > Note: properly, lockmode should be declared LOCKMODE not int, but that
>> > would require importing storage/lock.h into parse_relation.h. Since
>> > LOCKMODE is typedef'd as int anyway, that seems like overkill.
>>
>> but actually LOCKMODE has been in storage/lockdefs.h for a while,
>> which is intentionally a more narrow header. So we can include that
>> one in parse_relation.h and just use LOCKMODE normally.
>
> lockdefs.h is much younger (4eda0a64705763854225a29703b606692af50e77)
> than the comment (b153c0920960a6059b67969469166fb29c0105d7) mentioned
> above. The commit changed some #include "lock.h" to use lockdefs.h. I
> guess it didn't notice that parse_relation.h can use it because it
> didn't include lock.h and didn't define LOCKMODE. The change looks
> good to me.
committed
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2026-02-23 20:27:30 | Re: Use LOCKMODE in parse_relation.c/.h |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-02-23 20:20:13 | Re: PSA: Planning to grease protocol connections during 19beta |