Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Takahiro Itagaki
> <itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> - There are needless whitespace changes in the definition of struct
>>> Counters. The changes to the existing four members should be
>>> reverted, and the new members should be made to match the existing
>>> members.
>>
>> That's because the 'shared_blks_written' field is too long to keep the
>> existing indentations. Since we still have some rooms in 80 columns,
>> I'd like to change all of them as the previous patch.
> I don't necessarily know what the right thing to do with the new ones
> is, but I am pretty sure that pg_indent will revert any changes you
> make to the existing ones.
That it will. The proposed changes to the existing lines are an
exercise in uselessness; and to the extent that you format the added
lines with this layout in mind, the final result could be worse than
what you'd get if you adapt to pg_indent's rules to start with.
One possibility is to adopt shorter field names than these.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
