Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqSdFOQC0evc0r1nJeQyGBqjBrR41MC4rcMqUUpoJaZbtQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> No, because the output of SHOW is always of type text, regardless of
>>> the type of the GUC.
>>
>> Thinking about that over night, that looks pretty nice. What would be
>> nicer though would be to add INT8OID and BYTEAOID in the list, and
>> convert as well the other replication commands. At the end, I think
>> that we should finish by being able to remove all pq_* routine
>> dependencies in walsender.c, saving quite a couple of lines.
>
> Might be worth investigating, but I don't feel any obligation to do
> that right now.  Thanks for the review; committed.

OK, I have done this refactoring effort as attached because I think
that's really worth it. And here are the diff numbers:
 3 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-)
That's a bit less than what I thought first because of all the
singularities of bytea in its output and the way TIMELINE_HISTORY
takes advantage of the message level routines. Still for
IDENTIFY_SYSTEM, START_REPLICATION and CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT the
gains in readability are here.

What do you think?
-- 
Michael

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mithun Cy
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pageinspect: Hash index support
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] \h tab-completion