Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c

From: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>
To: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c
Date: 2005-11-22 02:57:52
Message-ID: CF1E0051-1729-4A64-B054-4D442D1823D3@myrealbox.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:44 , Qingqing Zhou wrote:

>
> "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> wrote
>> In two of the sections covered by #ifdef WAL_DEBUG there are
>> declarations
>> like:
>>
>> char buf[8192];
>>
> Those two 8192 have nothing to do with BLCKSZ, it is just an arbitrary
> buffer size as long as it is big enough to hold debug information.

Would it make sense to abstract that out so it's clear that it's
*not* related to BLCKSZ? Or maybe just a comment would be enough.

Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Qingqing Zhou 2005-11-22 03:01:47 Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c
Previous Message Qingqing Zhou 2005-11-22 02:44:54 Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c