From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_tablespace_databases |
Date: | 2004-07-06 11:15:18 |
Message-ID: | 200407061115.i66BFIl14939@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> > Joe Conway wrote:
> >> 2) This allocation size was a bit ambigous and I think based on a once
> >> longer tablespace directory name:
>
> > This size calculation originated (copy/paste) from
> > commands/tablespace.c,
>
> Yeah --- Bruce did not adjust the string length calculations when he
> editorialized on the directory name. I'd been meaning to go back and
> make them match.
>
> > should be clarified there too (and "pg_tblspc" is
> > hardcoded in strings, could be extracted to a macro definition).
>
> [ shrug... ] The name is not going to change again. I have never cared
> for the practice of writing strlen("foo") as if it were a compile-time
> constant. But certainly it would be entirely pointless to define such a
> macro and then use it in only one place.
I think with gcc strlen("foo") is a compile-time constant. At least I
remember that as a gcc optimization. What do you prefer?
sizeof("foo")-1? Certainly +3 is poorly documented, no?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2004-07-06 12:44:55 | Re: pg_tablespace_databases |
Previous Message | Walter | 2004-07-06 04:15:08 | Re: Digital Mars C++ - Clients |