Re: rm_desc signature

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: rm_desc signature
Date: 2014-06-17 01:19:31
Message-ID: CAMkU=1x1b3Gd-r1TYT0U6rLDHFxy_+VhJ1W8va05uCiHXfG+XA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Friday, June 13, 2014, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
wrote:

> As part of the WAL-format changing patch I've been working on, I changed
> the signature of the rm_desc function from:
>
> void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, uint8 xl_info, char *rec);
> void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, XLogRecord *record);
>
> The WAL-format patch needed that because it added more functions/macros
> for working with XLogRecords, also used by rm_desc routines, but it seems
> like a sensible change anyway. IMHO it was always a bit strange that
> rm_desc was passed the info field and record payload separately.
>
> So I propose to do that change as a separate commit. Per attached. This
> has no functional changes, it's just refactoring.
>
> Any objections?
>

This commit, or a related one, changed the default (i.e. commented out)
nature of:

#define WAL_DEBUG

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-06-17 01:47:30 btreecheck extension
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-06-17 00:53:48 Re: Doing better at HINTing an appropriate column within errorMissingColumn()