On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 1:10 PM Daniil Davydov <3daniss...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 2:14 PM Stepan Neretin wrote:
> >
> > The first thing we both noticed is that the macro calls a function that
> won't be available without an additional header. This seems a bit
> inconv
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 2:14 PM Stepan Neretin wrote:
>
> The first thing we both noticed is that the macro calls a function that won't
> be available without an additional header. This seems a bit inconvenient.
Well, I rebased the patch onto the latest `master`
(b51f86e49a7f119004c0ce5d0be
Hello,
Dmitriy Bondar and I decided to review this patch as part of the CommitFest
Review.
The first thing we both noticed is that the macro calls a function that
won't be available without an additional header. This seems a bit
inconvenient.
I also have a question: is the logic correct that if
Hi,
I am posting the new v2 patch, which is now rebased on the `master` branch.
Waiting for your feedback :)
--
Best regards,
Daniil Davydov
From 2e43a1411ebcb37b2c0c1d6bac758e48799d2c4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniil Davidov
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 17:11:16 +0700
Subject: [PATCH v2] Add ma
Hi,
Postgres allows us to pass BufferManagerRelation structure to
functions in two ways : BMR_REL and BMR_SMGR.
In case we use BMR_REL, the "smgr" field of structure initialized this way :
***
if (bmr.smgr == NULL)
{
bmr.smgr = RelationGetSmgr(bmr.rel);
bmr.relpersistence = bmr.rel->rd_rel-
