Prev: [HACKERS] knngist patch support
Next: pgsql: Remove old-style VACUUM FULL (which wasknown for a little while
From: Tom Lane on 14 Feb 2010 12:24
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> writes:
> OK. In that case, any objections to my applying the attached patch,
> which I believe implements this as you suggested?

Um, did you test this version? It looks like the macros are still
defined according to the idea that SearchSysCache takes five arguments.

Also, I'd suggest adding explicit comments to syscache.h suggesting
that SearchSysCache etc are meant to be called via the macros
rather than directly.

I didn't check all the individual calls, but it looks generally
sane except for those points.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

From: Robert Haas on 14 Feb 2010 13:08
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(a)sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> writes:
>> OK.  In that case, any objections to my applying the attached patch,
>> which I believe implements this as you suggested?
>
> Um, did you test this version?  It looks like the macros are still
> defined according to the idea that SearchSysCache takes five arguments.

You are correct. I realized that this morning while I was shaving.
Sorry about that.

> Also, I'd suggest adding explicit comments to syscache.h suggesting
> that SearchSysCache etc are meant to be called via the macros
> rather than directly.

Good idea.

> I didn't check all the individual calls, but it looks generally
> sane except for those points.

Will fix and commit.

....Robert

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: [HACKERS] knngist patch support
Next: pgsql: Remove old-style VACUUM FULL (which wasknown for a little while