Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue
Date
Msg-id 20190404130258.GA7320@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Apr-04, Thomas Munro wrote:

> I don't think it's project policy to put a single typedef into its own
> header like that, and I'm not sure where else to put it.

shrug.  Looks fine to me.  I suppose if we don't have it anywhere, it's
just because we haven't needed that particular trick yet.  Creating a
file with a lone typedef seems better than using uint32 to me.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Checksum errors in pg_stat_database
Next
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: reloption to prevent VACUUM from truncating empty pages atthe end of relation