Re: pg_filedump 9.3: checksums (and a few other fixes)
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_filedump 9.3: checksums (and a few other fixes) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1374386563.2902.9.camel@jdavis обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_filedump 9.3: checksums (and a few other fixes) (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 13:43 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane escribió: > > > My feeling about this code is that the reason we print the infomask in > > hex is so you can see exactly which bits are set if you care, and that > > the rest of the line ought to be designed to interpret the bits in as > > reader-friendly a way as possible. So I don't buy the notion that we > > should just print out a name for each bit that's set. I'd rather > > replace individual bit names with items like LOCKED_FOR_KEY_SHARE, > > LOCKED_FOR_SHARE, etc in cases where you have to combine multiple > > bits to understand the meaning. > > Okay, that's what I've been saying all along so I cannot but agree. I > haven't reviewed Jeff's patch lately; Jeff, does Tom's suggestion need > some more new code, and if so are you open to doing this work, or shall > I? At first glance it seems like a pretty trivial change. I'm going on vacation tomorrow and unfortunately I haven't had a chance to look at this. Pgfoundry CVS is down, so I can't see whether it's already been committed or not. Regards,Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: