On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 07:22:32AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> Yeah, what I meant to say is that one could think for example that's the
> PgStatShared_Archiver size while in fact it's the PgStat_ArchiverStats size.
> I think it's more confusing when writing the stats. Here we are manipulating
> "snapshot" and "snapshot" offsets. It was not that confusing when reading as we
> are manipulating "shmem" and "shared" offsets.
>
> As I said, the code is fully correct, that's just the wording here that sounds
> weird to me in the "snapshot" context.
After sleeping on it, I can see your point. If we were to do the
(shared_data_len -> stats_data_len) switch, could it make sense to
rename shared_data_off to stats_data_off to have a better symmetry?
This one is the offset of the stats data in a shmem entry, so perhaps
shared_data_off is OK, but it feels a bit inconsistent as well.
> Except the above (which is just a Nit), 0001 LGTM.
Thanks, I've applied 0001 for now to improve the serialization of this code.
--
Michael
