Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks
Date
Msg-id 20190911054551.GI1953@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 08:29:43AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Good thought, but I think even if we want to change the name of
> tuple_data_split, it might be better done separately.

Yes, that's not the problem of this patch.  Not sure if it actually
makes sense either to change it.

The regression tests added are rather unreadable when it comes to
print a lot of infomask flags.  Could you add at least some unnest()
calls to the queries using heap_infomask_flags()?  It would make the
diff lookup much more straight-forward to understand.

It would be good to comment as well what 2816 and 1080 stand for.  The
current code makes it hard to understand for which purpose this is
used in the tests.

+      If decode_combined is set, combination flags like
Missing a markup here.

I am switching the patch as "waiting on author".  Could you address
the comments raised please?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: doc: update PL/pgSQL sample loop function