Re: dblink patches for comment - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: dblink patches for comment
Date
Msg-id 29955.1243904994@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: dblink patches for comment  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Responses Re: dblink patches for comment  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> Probably better if I break this up in logical chunks too. This patch 
> only addresses the refactoring you requested here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/28719.1230996378@sss.pgh.pa.us

This looks sane to me in a quick once-over, though I've not tested it.

A small suggestion for future patches: don't bother to reindent code
chunks that aren't changing --- it just complicates the diff with a
lot of uninteresting whitespace changes.  You can either do that after
review, or leave it to be done by pgindent.  (Speaking of which, we
need to schedule that soon...)
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_standby -l might destory the archived file
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_standby -l might destory the archived file