On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, I just verified that bimg_info is not even valid if > has_image is not set. > In DecodeXLogRecord, we initialize bimg_info only when has_image flag > is set. So, keeping them > separate doesn't look a good approach to me. If we keep them separate, > the output > of the following assert is undefined: > Assert(XLogRecHasBlockImage(record, block_id) || > !XLogRecBlockImageApply(record, block_id)). > > Thoughts??
Yes, that's exactly the reason why we should keep both macros as checking for separate things: apply implies that has_image is set and that's normal, hence we could use sanity checks by just using those macros and not propagating xlogreader.h. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
