On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 12:18:08PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I think what we ought to do to solve this problem permanently is to stop > making the callers of the HeapTupleSatisfiesFoo() routines responsible > for checking for hint bit updates. It would be a lot safer, and AFAICS > not noticeably less efficient, for those routines to call > SetBufferCommitInfoNeedsSave for themselves. This would require adding > to their parameter lists, because they aren't currently told which > buffer the tuple is in, but that's no big deal considering we get to > simplify the calling logic in all the places that are faithfully doing > the t_infomask update check. > > Comments?
I remember seeing this code when coding the phantom Xid idea and wondering why such an error-prone style was used. It never ocurred to me to change it (or maybe have the guts to do it), but now that you mention it it certainly seems a good idea. -- Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>) Tulio: oh, para qué servirá este boton, Juan Carlos? Policarpo: No, aléjense, no toquen la consola! Juan Carlos: Lo apretaré una y otra vez. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
