The author has been given feedback so this has been saved for the next
commit-fest:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brendan Jurd wrote:
> On 31/03/2008, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > There isn't any functional difference there. I am not sure, but I think
> > the reason print.c has its own malloc wrappers instead of depending on
> > common.c's is that we use print.c in some bin/scripts/ programs that
> > do not want common.c too.
> >
>
> Okay, thanks (to Heikki as well) for the clarification. It's good to
> know they are functionally equivalent. I'll do some snooping in
> /scripts to get a better view of the situation.
>
> > > 2. describe only does an mbvalidate for WIN32, but print does it in all cases.
> >
> > I don't know why describe only does that for WIN32; it looks
> > inconsistent to me too. Possibly some trolling in the CVS history would
> > give a clue about this.
> >
>
> Alright, I'll be spending some quality time with 'annotate' then =)
>
> >
> > If you're not actively working on this patch right now, I am going to go
> > ahead and commit the other open patches for describe.c. If you do have
> > a patch in progress, I'm willing to hold off to avoid any merge
> > conflicts. Let me know.
> >
>
> I didn't get much beyond sketching out my struct. Now that I have
> answers to the questions I raised above, I can push forward with the
> patch, but I wouldn't expect to have anything to submit for another
> couple of days at least.
>
> Short answer: I have zero objections to you committing those patches.
>
> Thanks for your time,
> BJ
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
