Greetings Claudio,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paquier@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Jing Wang <jingwangian@gmail.com> wrote:
> > A few general comments.
> >
> > + FreeSpaceMapVacuum(onerel, 64);
> >
> > Just want to know why '64' is used here? It's better to give a description.
> >
> > + else
> > + {
> > + newslot = fsm_get_avail(page, 0);
> > + }
> >
> > Since there is only one line in the else the bracket will not be needed. And
> > there in one more space ahead of else which should be removed.
> >
> >
> > + if (nindexes == 0 &&
> > + (vacuumed_pages_at_fsm_vac - vacuumed_pages) >
> > vacuum_fsm_every_pages)
> > + {
> > + /* Vacuum the Free Space Map */
> > + FreeSpaceMapVacuum(onerel, 0);
> > + vacuumed_pages_at_fsm_vac = vacuumed_pages;
> > + }
> >
> > vacuumed_pages_at_fsm_vac is initialised with value zero and seems no chance
> > to go into the bracket.
>
> The patch presented still applies, and there has been a review two
> days ago. This is a short delay to answer for the author, so I am
> moving this patch to next CF with the same status of waiting on
> author.
Looks like this patch probably still applies and the changes suggested
above seem pretty small, any chance you can provide an updated patch
soon Claudio, so that it can be reviewed properly during this
commitfest?
Thanks!
Stephen
