Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On Saturday 14 November 2009 15:33:00 Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> Andres Freund wrote:
>> > I had a bug there and it was not found by the regression tests.
>> > Perhaps I should take a stab and add at least some more...
>>
>> Sounds like a good idea.
> Hm. There actually are tests excercising the part where I had a
> bug... Strange. It was a bug involving uninitialized data so
> probably the regression tests where just "lucky".
OK. I won't be looking for extra tests.
>> > I have to say that that code is not exactly clear and well
>> > documented...
>> Yeah. I was happy with the level of documentation that you added
>> with your new code, but what was there before is mighty thin. If
>> you gleaned enough information while working on it to feel
>> comfortable adding documentation anywhere else, that would be a
>> good thing.
> It definitely would be a good thing. But that would definitely be
> seperate patch. But I fear my current leel of knowledge is
> sufficient and also I am not sure if I can make myself interested
> enough in that part.
Fair enough. I won't be looking for new comments for the old code.
>> By the way, I found one typo in the comments -- it should by
>> useful, not usefull.
> Ok, will update.
Given how trivial that is, I'm putting this back in "Needs Review"
status, and resuming my review work. Barring surprises, I should wrap
this up whenever I can free up a two or three hours.
-Kevin
