Re: [HACKERS] rm_desc signature
On Friday, June 13, 2014, Heikki Linnakangas hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote: As part of the WAL-format changing patch I've been working on, I changed the signature of the rm_desc function from: void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, uint8 xl_info, char *rec); void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, XLogRecord *record); The WAL-format patch needed that because it added more functions/macros for working with XLogRecords, also used by rm_desc routines, but it seems like a sensible change anyway. IMHO it was always a bit strange that rm_desc was passed the info field and record payload separately. So I propose to do that change as a separate commit. Per attached. This has no functional changes, it's just refactoring. Any objections? This commit, or a related one, changed the default (i.e. commented out) nature of: #define WAL_DEBUG Cheers, Jeff
Re: [HACKERS] rm_desc signature
On 06/17/2014 04:19 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: This commit, or a related one, changed the default (i.e. commented out) nature of: #define WAL_DEBUG Oops. Fixed, thanks! - Heikki -- 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] rm_desc signature
On 2014-06-13 14:37:33 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: As part of the WAL-format changing patch I've been working on, I changed the signature of the rm_desc function from: void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, uint8 xl_info, char *rec); void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, XLogRecord *record); The WAL-format patch needed that because it added more functions/macros for working with XLogRecords, also used by rm_desc routines, but it seems like a sensible change anyway. IMHO it was always a bit strange that rm_desc was passed the info field and record payload separately. +1. I've found this annoying in the past. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services -- 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] rm_desc signature
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: On 2014-06-13 14:37:33 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: As part of the WAL-format changing patch I've been working on, I changed the signature of the rm_desc function from: void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, uint8 xl_info, char *rec); void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, XLogRecord *record); The WAL-format patch needed that because it added more functions/macros for working with XLogRecords, also used by rm_desc routines, but it seems like a sensible change anyway. IMHO it was always a bit strange that rm_desc was passed the info field and record payload separately. +1, too. -/* #define WAL_DEBUG */ +#define WAL_DEBUG ISTM you just forgot to exclude this change from the patch. Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- 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] rm_desc signature
At 2014-06-13 13:39:58 +0200, and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, uint8 xl_info, char *rec); void (*rm_desc) (StringInfo buf, XLogRecord *record); […] +1. I've found this annoying in the past. I like it too. I was just moving some code from pg_xlogdump into another (new) rm_desc-like callback, and passing in the XLogRecord makes much more sense to me. -- Abhijit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
