Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Glaesemann
Subject Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c
Date
Msg-id CF1E0051-1729-4A64-B054-4D442D1823D3@myrealbox.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c  ("Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>)
Responses Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c  (Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Nov 22, 2005, at 11:44 , Qingqing Zhou wrote:

>
> "Mark Kirkwood" <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote
>> In two of the sections covered by #ifdef WAL_DEBUG there are  
>> declarations
>> like:
>>
>> char        buf[8192];
>>
> Those two 8192 have nothing to do with BLCKSZ, it is just an arbitrary
> buffer size as long as it is big enough to hold debug information.

Would it make sense to abstract that out so it's clear that it's  
*not* related to BLCKSZ? Or maybe just a comment would be enough.

Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Qingqing Zhou"
Date:
Subject: Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c
Next
From: Qingqing Zhou
Date:
Subject: Re: Use of 8192 as BLCKSZ in xlog.c