| From: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix inconsistencies for v12 (pass 2) |
| Date: | 2019-06-14 04:16:15 |
| Message-ID: | f9b20f30-b00f-b3c9-7646-1bf5e90a9e41@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello,
13.06.2019 11:10, Michael Paquier wrote:
> The last trace of tss_htup has been removed as of 2e3da03, and I see
> no mention of it in the related thread. Andres, is that intentional
> for table AMs to keep a trace of a currently-fetched tuple for a TID
> scan or something that can be removed? The field is still
> documented, so the patch is incomplete if we finish by removing the
> field. And my take is that we should keep it.
Andres, I've found another unused structure field "was_xmin" in the
was_running structure, having the following comment:
* Outdated: This struct isn't used for its original purpose anymore, but
* can't be removed / changed in a minor version, because it's stored
* on-disk.
This comment lives here since 955a684e, May 13 2017. Shouldn't the
outdated structure be removed in v12?
Best regards,
Alexander
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-06-14 04:40:09 | Re: ldapbindpasswdfile |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-06-14 04:09:36 | Re: proposal: new polymorphic types - commontype and commontypearray |