From: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
Cc: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, kop(at)meme(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function |
Date: | 2016-10-28 18:18:10 |
Message-ID: | 20161028131810.5481add9@slate.meme.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200
Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com> wrote:
> ...
> the v9 of the patch, attached here.
I notice that there are a number of user-supplied GUC
values for log_destination that are repeatedly used,
both in the GUC code and in your patch. These are
presently written as hardcoded strings.
Attached are 2 patches which abstract the values a
user is supposed to supply for log_destination.
patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.guc_values-part1
This applies to both master HEAD and on top of your v9
patch. It abstracts the user-supplied values within
the GUC code.
patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.guc_values-part2
This applies on top of your v9 patch.
I couldn't find a good place to put the newly defined symbols
in the existing code so the part1 patch creates
src/include/utils/guc_values.h. Someone who knows
the code better than me would be better able to judge
if making a new .h file is a good idea. Likewise, I presume
that a "GUCV_" prefix for the new symbols is good, but this
too could use review.
The odd part about the part1 patch is that GUCV_EVENTLOG
is never used anywhere but in src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c.
But it is used twice there and it seemed like as long as
I was doing the rest of the log_destination values I should
abstract eventlog too.
If we use these patches I propose that we keep the
part1 patch and submit it separately to the committers.
Seems like it'd be easier to review/commit when the changes to
existing code are kept separate from new code.
> Thanks a lot.
Thank you also for considering my ideas. :)
Regards,
Karl <kop(at)meme(dot)com>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.guc_values-part2 | application/octet-stream | 2.6 KB |
patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.guc_values-part1 | application/octet-stream | 2.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2016-10-28 19:00:56 | Re: Speed of user-defined aggregates using array_append as transfn |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-10-28 18:04:45 | Speed of user-defined aggregates using array_append as transfn |