From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add isCatalogRel in rmgrdesc |
Date: | 2023-12-21 01:18:22 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoDQ80Himyhpwu14FUE4UezCq7biOCGAY6DcVBjd4b34sA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:13 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 9:04 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 10:43:30AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > Thank you for updating the patch. The v2 patch looks good to me. I'll
> > > push it, barring any objections.
> >
> > This is capturing the eight records where the flag exists, so it looks
> > OK seen from here.
> >
> > As you said, there may be a point in reducing the output in the most
> > common case and not show the flag when !isCatalogRel, but I cannot get
> > excited about that either because that would require one to do more
> > cross-checks with the core code when looking at WAL dumps.
>
> Thank you for the comments. Agreed.
>
> I've just pushed, bf6260b39.
>
FYI, in the commitfest app, there seems to be two duplicated entries
for this item:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/46/4694/
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/46/4695/
I've marked the latter one as committed, and will remove the former.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Naylor | 2023-12-21 01:19:44 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |
Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2023-12-21 01:13:16 | Re: Add isCatalogRel in rmgrdesc |