Обсуждение: Unused stricture field in xlogreader:DecodedBkpBlock
Hi hackers,
I found that DecodedBkpBlock.data_bufsz field in xlogreader.h is never ever used in the current code and not even mentioned in any comments. It just occupies memory and removing it doesn't seem to break anything.
Should we remove it maybe? Attached is the removal patch.
--
Вложения
Hi, On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 at 14:37, Mikhail Gribkov <youzhick@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi hackers, > > I found that DecodedBkpBlock.data_bufsz field in xlogreader.h is never ever used in the current code and not even mentionedin any comments. It just occupies memory and removing it doesn't seem to break anything. > Should we remove it maybe? Attached is the removal patch. Thanks for the patch! It looks like it should have been removed in the 3f1ce97346. -- Regards, Nazir Bilal Yavuz Microsoft
On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 5:06 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 at 14:37, Mikhail Gribkov <youzhick@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi hackers, > > > > I found that DecodedBkpBlock.data_bufsz field in xlogreader.h is never ever used in the current code and not even mentionedin any comments. It just occupies memory and removing it doesn't seem to break anything. > > Should we remove it maybe? Attached is the removal patch. > > Thanks for the patch! It looks like it should have been removed in the > 3f1ce97346. > +1 to remove it. I'll push the patch, barring objections. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 11:22 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 5:06 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 at 14:37, Mikhail Gribkov <youzhick@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi hackers, > > > > > > I found that DecodedBkpBlock.data_bufsz field in xlogreader.h is never ever used in the current code and not even mentionedin any comments. It just occupies memory and removing it doesn't seem to break anything. > > > Should we remove it maybe? Attached is the removal patch. > > > > Thanks for the patch! It looks like it should have been removed in the > > 3f1ce97346. > > > > +1 to remove it. I'll push the patch, barring objections. > Pushed. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com