Re: a couple of small cleanup patches for DSM-related code
От | Masahiko Sawada |
---|---|
Тема | Re: a couple of small cleanup patches for DSM-related code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAD21AoB91jh2zfAH7NRZqFZaV0+7RLuMeGuzG7x=Q4xLYxmgew@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | a couple of small cleanup patches for DSM-related code (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: a couple of small cleanup patches for DSM-related code
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 12:48 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote: > > 0001 changes test_dsm_registry.c to use PG_GETARG_INT32 and > PG_RETURN_INT32. The installation script and the C code both used signed > integers, so I'm not sure why I used PG_GETARG/RETURN_UINT32 in commit > 8b2bcf3. I'm planning to back-patch this one to v17, where the DSM > registry was first introduced. +1 > 0002 follows commit 5fe08c0's example and changes some calls to > dshash_attach() and dsa_create_in_place() to use NULL instead of 0 for > pointer arguments. I don't see any need to back-patch this one, but I also > don't see any need to wait for v19devel to commit it. It seems okay to me to commit it to HEAD as it's a cosmetic change and improves the consistency between v18 and 19. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: