| From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, reid(dot)thompson(at)crunchydata(dot)com, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tristan Partin <tristan(at)neon(dot)tech> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code |
| Date: | 2024-03-21 10:31:17 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQTR5MNnHuEH7Es06Q1Bufse2etO5McRKqd0+2Skc+W2DQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 08:16, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> Yeah, it's not a very valuable assertion. Removed, thanks!
How about we add it as a static assert instead of removing it, like we
have for many other similar arrays.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Add-child_process_kinds-static-assert.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2024-03-21 10:43:31 | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
| Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2024-03-21 10:00:00 | Re: Test 031_recovery_conflict.pl is not immune to autovacuum |