On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> ... BTW, with respect to the documentation angle, it seems to me > that it'd be better if GenericXLogRegister were renamed to > GenericXLogRegisterBuffer, or perhaps GenericXLogRegisterPage. > I think this would make the documentation clearer, and it would > also make it easier to add other sorts of Register actions later, > if we ever think of some (which seems not unlikely, really). > > Another thing to think about is whether we're going to regret > hard-wiring the third argument as a boolean. Should we consider > making it a bitmask of flags, instead? It's not terribly hard > to think of other flags we might want there in future; for example > maybe something to tell GenericXLogFinish whether it's worth trying > to identify data movement on the page rather than just doing the > byte-by-byte delta calculation. I agree with both of these ideas. Patch is attached. ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
generic-xlog-register.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
