Prev: [HACKERS] Package namespace and Safe init cleanup for plperl UPDATE 3 [PATCH]
Next: pgsql: Augment WAL records forbtree delete with GetOldestXmin() to
From: Joe Conway on 31 Jan 2010 12:51
On 01/31/2010 09:42 AM, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> I don't find that horrid. AFAICT, that's the only advantage of the
> two-arrays method. By the way, it's that kind of code (keywords
> declaration separated from values declaration) that got commited in the
> previous patch
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-01/msg00398.php).
> I merely used the same code for the other binaries.

Yes, I separated them, because otherwise the compiler complained about
the declaration not being at the top of a block. Of course Tom's other
complaint and this one can both be satisfied by not doing the static
assignment in the declaration.

I'll fix the already committed code and take a look at refactoring this
latest patch. I stand by the two arrays mthod decision though -- I find
combining them into a single array to be unseemly.

Joe

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: [HACKERS] Package namespace and Safe init cleanup for plperl UPDATE 3 [PATCH]
Next: pgsql: Augment WAL records forbtree delete with GetOldestXmin() to