Re: [PATCH] fix two shadow vars (src/backend/commands/sequence.c) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ranier Vilela
Subject Re: [PATCH] fix two shadow vars (src/backend/commands/sequence.c)
Date
Msg-id CAEudQAoAj90oTjD2dUJaEimxnCsTWq0m4CdmA8w0wDyv-hXZXg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] fix two shadow vars (src/backend/commands/sequence.c)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] fix two shadow vars (src/backend/commands/sequence.c)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Em qui., 11 de jun. de 2020 às 17:19, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> escreveu:
On 2020-Jun-11, Ranier Vilela wrote:

> Hi,
> src/backend/commands/sequence.c
> Has two shadows (buf var), with two unnecessary variables declared.

These are not unnecessary -- removing them breaks translatability of
those messages.  If these were ssize_t you could use '%zd' (see commit
ac4ef637ad2f) but I don't think you can in this case.
Hi Alvaro, thanks for reply.

File backend\utils\sort\tuplesort.c:
elog(LOG, "worker %d using " INT64_FORMAT " KB of memory for read buffers among %d input tapes",
File backend\storage\ipc\shm_toc.c:
elog(ERROR, "could not find key " UINT64_FORMAT " in shm TOC at %p",
File backend\storage\large_object\inv_api.c:
* use errmsg_internal here because we don't want to expose INT64_FORMAT
errmsg_internal("invalid large object seek target: " INT64_FORMAT,
 
elog and errmsg_internal, permits use as proposed by the patch,
does it mean that errmsg, does not allow and does not do the same job as snprintf?

regards,
Ranier Vilela

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Building PostgreSQL extensions on Windows