Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] amroutine->amsupport from numeric to defined constants

[Teodor Sigaev]

I think this number should be specified only once, in .h file.

Yep, that sounds true.
It may be a good idea to make something similar for contrib/bloom if >
0 values are defined for amstrategies or amsupport for consistency.


Thank you, pushed.

--
Teodor Sigaev   E-mail: teo...@sigaev.ru
   WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] amroutine->amsupport from numeric to defined constants

[Michael Paquier]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Nikolay Shaplov
 wrote:
> While working with postgres code, I found that for gist index number of
> amsupport procs are defined two times. First in src/include/access/gist.h
>
> #define GISTNProcs  9
>
> and second in src/backend/access/gist/gist.c
>
> amroutine->amsupport = 9;
>
> I think this number should be specified only once, in .h file.

Yep, that sounds true.

> So I would offer a patch for all access methods. That changes amsupport and
> amstrategies from numbers to defined constants. (I've added two of them where
> they were missing)

It may be a good idea to make something similar for contrib/bloom if >
0 values are defined for amstrategies or amsupport for consistency.
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers