On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Doug Doole writes:
>> Looks good to me.
>> The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer
>
> Pushed. Grepping found a few more places that should be changed to
> use these macros rather than referencing btpo_flags directly,
> so I did tha
Doug Doole writes:
> Looks good to me.
> The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer
Pushed. Grepping found a few more places that should be changed to
use these macros rather than referencing btpo_flags directly,
so I did that.
I tend to agree with Alvaro that it'd be better to get ri
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, passed
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:not tested
Looks good to me.
The new status of this patch is: Ready for Com
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 3:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera
>>> wrote:
Interesting. We learned elsewhere that it's better to i
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 3:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera
>> wrote:
>>> Interesting. We learned elsewhere that it's better to integrate the
>>> "!= 0" test as part of the macro definition; s
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 3:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>> Interesting. We learned elsewhere that it's better to integrate the
>> "!= 0" test as part of the macro definition; so a
>> better formulation of this patch would be to change the
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Interesting. We learned elsewhere that it's better to integrate the
> "!= 0" test as part of the macro definition; so a
> better formulation of this patch would be to change the
> P_INCOMPLETE_SPLIT macro and omit the comparison in the Asse
Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> While hacking the btree code I found two points we can improve in nbtxlog.c.
>
> @@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ _bt_clear_incomplete_split(XLogReaderState
> *record, uint8 block_id)
> Pagepage = (Page) BufferGetPage(buf);
> BTPageOpaque pa
Hi,
While hacking the btree code I found two points we can improve in nbtxlog.c.
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ _bt_clear_incomplete_split(XLogReaderState
*record, uint8 block_id)
Pagepage = (Page) BufferGetPage(buf);
BTPageOpaque pageop = (BTPageOpaque)
PageGetSp
