Re: GUC values - recommended way to declare the C variables? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Smith
Subject Re: GUC values - recommended way to declare the C variables?
Date
Msg-id CAHut+PuG6CuTJRULyWURbDOZapukHAfqnbLd29nKiGDgGcY-Zw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GUC values - recommended way to declare the C variables?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 4:02 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 12:01:33PM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > SUGGESTION
> > /* Only applicable when prefetching is available */
>
> Thanks for the suggestion.  Done this way, then.
>
> > +/* Disabled on Windows as the performance overhead can be significant */
> > +#ifdef WIN32
> > +#define DEFAULT_UPDATE_PROCESS_TITLE false
> > +#else
> > +#define DEFAULT_UPDATE_PROCESS_TITLE true
> > +#endif
> >  extern PGDLLIMPORT bool update_process_title;
> >
> > Perhaps put that comment inside the #ifdef WIN32
>
> I'd keep that externally, as ps_status.h does so.
>
> > [...]
> > SUGGESTION
> > /* Check the GUC default and declared initial value for consistency */
>
> Okay, fine by me.
>
> I have split the change into two parts at the end: one to refactor and
> fix the C declarations, and a second to introduce the check routine
> with all the correct declarations in place.
>
> FWIW, I have been testing that with my own in-house modules and it has
> caught a few stupid inconsistencies.  Let's see how it goes.

Thanks for pushing.

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Use pg_pwritev_with_retry() instead of write() in dir_open_for_write() to avoid partial writes?
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding doubly linked list type which stores the number of items in the list