Re: Manual bitswizzling -> LOCKBIT_ON

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Manual bitswizzling -> LOCKBIT_ON
Date: 2015-09-28 15:01:38
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY3TrkcqZ=kDVefD2wrY0=7nxLPBhB8g1_qX_GGRu8oag@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> While studying lmgr code, I noticed that there are a couple of places
> that use 1 << x to convert a LOCKMODE to a LOCKMASK instead of the
> macro that is used elsewhere. Should that be changed for consistency,
> as in the attached?

Sure, why not?

Committed.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-09-28 15:03:18 Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-09-28 14:54:36 Re: PGXS "check" target forcing an install ?