On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2015-02-27 16:26:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> >> wrote: >> > On 2015-02-24 20:51:42 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> >> On 02/20/2015 05:21 PM, Andres Freund wrote: >> >> >There's one bit that I'm not so sure about though: To avoid duplication >> >> >I've added Parse(Commit/Abort)Record(), but unfortunately that has to be >> >> >available both in front and backend code - so it's currently living in >> >> >xactdesc.c. I think we can live with that, but it's certainly not >> >> >pretty. >> >> >> >> Yeah, that's ugly. Why does frontend code need that? The old format >> >> isn't exactly trivial for frontend code to decode either. >> > >> > pg_xlogdump outputs subxacts and such; I don't forsee other >> > usages. Sure, we could copy the code around, but I think that's worse >> > than having it in xactdesc.c. Needs a comment explaining why it's there >> > if I haven't added one already. >> >> FWIW, I think they would live better in frontend code for client >> applications. > > What do you mean with that? You mean you'd rather see a copy in > pg_xlogdump somewhere? How would you trigger that being used instead of > the normal description routine?
No, no. I meant that it is good the way your patch does it in xactdesc.c, where both frontend and backend can reach it. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
