Hi, On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 10:00 PM Andrey Borodin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 9 Oct 2025, at 17:33, Kirill Reshke <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Should we remove them, reducing overall cognitive complexity of GIN > > internals and reducing WAL footprint? > > The patch does not add a single line... that's impressive :) > > Why not wipe ginxlogSplit entirely? Will the code be clearer with > XLogRegisterData(&flags, sizeof(uint16))? > >
Looks like we will not be able to process old split records after this, as 'flags' field offset was changed. So probably these fields are for backward compatibility. Does it make sense? Best regards, Arseniy Mukhin
