Thread: [HACKERS] Fixup some misusage of appendStringInfo and friends
The attached cleans up a few small misusages of appendStringInfo and related functions. Some similar work was done in, f92d6a540ac443f85f0929b284edff67da14687a d02f16470f117db3038dbfd87662d5f0eb5a2a9b cacbdd78106526d7c4f11f90b538f96ba8696fb0 so the majority of these should all be new misuseages. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Attachment
I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do not see any issue with it. On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 9:13 AM, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > The attached cleans up a few small misusages of appendStringInfo and > related functions. > > Some similar work was done in, > > f92d6a540ac443f85f0929b284edff67da14687a > d02f16470f117db3038dbfd87662d5f0eb5a2a9b > cacbdd78106526d7c4f11f90b538f96ba8696fb0 > > so the majority of these should all be new misuseages. > > -- > David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company
On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do > not see any issue with it. Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest. > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 9:13 AM, David Rowley > <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> The attached cleans up a few small misusages of appendStringInfo and >> related functions. >> >> Some similar work was done in, >> >> f92d6a540ac443f85f0929b284edff67da14687a >> d02f16470f117db3038dbfd87662d5f0eb5a2a9b >> cacbdd78106526d7c4f11f90b538f96ba8696fb0 >> >> so the majority of these should all be new misuseages. >> >> -- >> David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ >> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services >> >> >> -- >> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) >> To make changes to your subscription: >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >> > > > -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On 27 April 2017 at 06:41, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >> I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do >> not see any issue with it. > > Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest. Thank you to both of you for looking. I'd thought that maybe the new stuff in PG10 should be fixed before the release. If we waited, and fix in PG11 then backpatching is more of a pain. However, I wasn't careful in the patch to touch only new to PG10 code. I'll defer to your better judgment and add to the next 'fest. Thanks -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
On 04/27/2017 03:14 AM, David Rowley wrote: > On 27 April 2017 at 06:41, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >>> I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do >>> not see any issue with it. >> >> Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest. > > Thank you to both of you for looking. I'd thought that maybe the new > stuff in PG10 should be fixed before the release. If we waited, and > fix in PG11 then backpatching is more of a pain. > > However, I wasn't careful in the patch to touch only new to PG10 code. > > I'll defer to your better judgment and add to the next 'fest. I think that's a very good argument. Cleaning up code that's new in this version seems like a fair game, and a good idea. The places that are not new in PostgreSQL 10 are more questionable, but seems harmless enough anyway. Did you have an outright objection to this, Peter? The patch looks good to me at a quick glance, I think we should commit this now. - Heikki
On 4/26/17 20:14, David Rowley wrote: > On 27 April 2017 at 06:41, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote: >>> I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do >>> not see any issue with it. >> >> Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest. > > Thank you to both of you for looking. I'd thought that maybe the new > stuff in PG10 should be fixed before the release. If we waited, and > fix in PG11 then backpatching is more of a pain. > > However, I wasn't careful in the patch to touch only new to PG10 code. > > I'll defer to your better judgment and add to the next 'fest. committed -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
On 16 August 2017 at 15:38, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > committed Thanks! -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services