Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean
Дата
Msg-id CAB7nPqSTc60qZpAMxUjMN4shWyhJbkpZimQR5yqnFA-j8AsmmA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: GinPageIs* don't actually return a boolean  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> On February 12, 2016 5:29:44 PM GMT+01:00, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> We should standardize on the "((var & FLAG) != 0)"
>>> pattern, which works reliably in all cases.
>
>> That's what the second version of my patch, and I presume Michael's updated one as well, does. I think the only open
questionis how far to backpatch. While annoying work, I think we should go all the way.
 
>
> I don't object to that, if someone wants to do the work.  A good argument
> for it is that we'd otherwise be laying a nasty trap for future
> back-patched bug fixes, which might well rely on the cleaned-up behavior.

From the MSVC-only perspective, that's down to 9.3, but it would
definitely make sense to backpatch 2 versions further down to
facilitate future bug fix integration, so +1 to get that down to 9.1.
Andres, I guess that you are on that? That's your patch after all.
-- 
Michael



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add some isolation tests for deadlock detection and resolution.
Следующее
От: Magnus Hagander
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Defaults for replication/backup