Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfduWpq22DHW+436p-rhz-xgf7HG=3nYts-j=cYjGyZ6MfA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c  (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>)
Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
... BTW, with respect to the documentation angle, it seems to me
that it'd be better if GenericXLogRegister were renamed to
GenericXLogRegisterBuffer, or perhaps GenericXLogRegisterPage.
I think this would make the documentation clearer, and it would
also make it easier to add other sorts of Register actions later,
if we ever think of some (which seems not unlikely, really).

Another thing to think about is whether we're going to regret
hard-wiring the third argument as a boolean.  Should we consider
making it a bitmask of flags, instead?  It's not terribly hard
to think of other flags we might want there in future; for example
maybe something to tell GenericXLogFinish whether it's worth trying
to identify data movement on the page rather than just doing the
byte-by-byte delta calculation.

I agree with both of these ideas. Patch is attached.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company 
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yury Zhuravlev
Date:
Subject: Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy]9.6 -> 10.0
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: Some other things about contrib/bloom and generic_xlog.c