On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 07:22:32AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > Yeah, what I meant to say is that one could think for example that's the > PgStatShared_Archiver size while in fact it's the PgStat_ArchiverStats size. > I think it's more confusing when writing the stats. Here we are manipulating > "snapshot" and "snapshot" offsets. It was not that confusing when reading as > we > are manipulating "shmem" and "shared" offsets. > > As I said, the code is fully correct, that's just the wording here that sounds > weird to me in the "snapshot" context.
After sleeping on it, I can see your point. If we were to do the (shared_data_len -> stats_data_len) switch, could it make sense to rename shared_data_off to stats_data_off to have a better symmetry? This one is the offset of the stats data in a shmem entry, so perhaps shared_data_off is OK, but it feels a bit inconsistent as well. > Except the above (which is just a Nit), 0001 LGTM. Thanks, I've applied 0001 for now to improve the serialization of this code. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
