Re: Data type correction in pgstat_report_replslot function parameters - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From vignesh C
Subject Re: Data type correction in pgstat_report_replslot function parameters
Date
Msg-id CALDaNm3834hp5QZPxGLvuJM02jhRzqbMD5Lpt-HKg3m3o2yEHw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Data type correction in pgstat_report_replslot function parameters  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 1:59 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2021/04/02 11:20, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 11:18 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2021/04/02 2:18, Jeevan Ladhe wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:20 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com <mailto:vignesh21@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      Hi,
> >>>
> >>>      While I was reviewing replication slot statistics code, I found one
> >>>      issue in the data type used for pgstat_report_replslot function
> >>>      parameters. We pass int64 variables to the function but the function
> >>>      prototype uses int type. I I felt the function parameters should be
> >>>      int64. Attached patch fixes the same.
> >>
> >> Isn't it better to use PgStat_Counter instead of int64?
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for your comment, the updated patch contains the changes for it.
>
> Thanks for updating the patch! Pushed.

Thanks for pushing.

Regards,
Vignesh



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: Using COPY FREEZE in pgbench
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: SP-GiST confusion: indexed column's type vs. index column type