Re: Add isCatalogRel in rmgrdesc

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
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 00:04:38
Message-ID: ZYOBFhJOkIIv7XaE@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeremy Schneider 2023-12-21 00:04:39 Re: Built-in CTYPE provider
Previous Message Jeremy Schneider 2023-12-20 23:47:51 Re: Built-in CTYPE provider