From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: Remove XLogRecGetFullXid() in xlogreader.c? |
Date: | 2025-01-17 15:39:16 |
Message-ID: | Z4p5pEWtZ9dbn7aE@nathan |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(I've added Thomas Munro to the thread.)
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 02:00:49PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> XLogRecGetFullXid() has been introduced in 67b9b3ca3283 back in 2019,
> but as far as I can see this has never been used in the code and this
> is used nowhere in the core code.
>
> I have looked at Debian's codesearch and also looked at traces of it
> on github without seeing it being used anywhere. Knowing that this
> was originally intended for a hypothetical undo log patch back then,
> for which no work has been done for years, is there any point in
> keeping this function in core?
>
> This issue has been raised on a separate thread, where Noah has sent a
> patch to consolidate a bit some epoch calculations for
> FullTransactionIds, around here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z4i6MbUlZxjK1rRh@paquier.xyz
>
> Removing it would have the benefit to do a bit less refactoring for
> some of the work of the other thread, and this removes all traces of
> -DFRONTEND in xlogreader.h. ;)
Seems reasonable to me. I think the counterargument is that folks
developing new AMs should use this [0], but if no such users have
materialized in several years, then maybe that's no longer a concern.
[0] https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKG%2BmLmuDjMi6o1dxkKvGRL56Y2Rz%2BiXAcrZV03G9ZuFQ8Q%40mail.gmail.com
--
nathan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-01-17 15:40:54 | Re: pure parsers and reentrant scanners |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-01-17 15:35:55 | Re: pure parsers and reentrant scanners |