On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 7:16 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 5:38 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 03:08:36PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > On 2019-Apr-26, Fujii Masao wrote: > > >> I did that arrangement because the format of PREPARE TRANSACTION record, > > >> i.e., that struct, also needs to be accessed in backend and frontend. > > >> But, of course, if there is smarter way, I'm happy to adopt that! > > > > > > I don't know. I spent some time staring at the code involved, and it > > > seems it'd be possible to improve just a little bit on cleanliness > > > grounds, with a lot of effort, but not enough practical value. > > > > Describing those records is something we should do. There are other > > parsing routines in xactdesc.c for commit and abort records, so having > > that extra routine for prepare at the same place does not sound > > strange to me. > > > > +typedef xl_xact_prepare TwoPhaseFileHeader; > > I find this mapping implementation a bit lazy, and your > > newly-introduced xl_xact_prepare does not count for all the contents > > of the actual WAL record for PREPARE TRANSACTION. Wouldn't it be > > better to put all the contents of the record in the same structure, > > and not only the 2PC header information? > > This patch doesn't apply anymore, could you send a rebase?
Yes, attached is the updated version of the patch. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
prepare-xact-desc_v2.patch
Description: Binary data
