On 08/04/2015 11:47 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
<i.kurbangal...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
A new version of the patch. I used your idea with macros, and with tranches that
allowed us to remove array with names (they can be written directly to the
corresponding
tranche).
You seem not to have addressed a few of the points I brought up here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmoaGqhah0VTamsfaOMaE9uOrCPYSXN8hCS9=wirupjs...@mail.gmail.com
About `memcpy`, PgBackendStatus struct already have a bunch of
multi-byte variables, so it will be
not consistent anyway if somebody will want to copy it in that way. On
the other hand two bytes in this case
give less overhead because we can avoid the offset calculations. And as
I've mentioned before the class
of wait will be useful when monitoring of waits will be extended.
Other things from that patch already changed in latest patch.
On 08/04/2015 11:53 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Just a bystander here, I haven't reviewed this patch at all, but I have
two questions,
1. have you tested this under -DEXEC_BACKEND ? I wonder if those
initializations are going to work on Windows.
No, it wasn't tested on Windows
--
Ildus Kurbangaliev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
