On 2025-Mar-17, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 2:43 AM Álvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > Tom didn't say he didn't like this change. He said he didn't like a
> > different change, which is not the one I committed.
>
> Sorry, I should have read the emails more carefully. I missed the fac
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 2:43 AM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom didn't say he didn't like this change. He said he didn't like a
> different change, which is not the one I committed.
Sorry, I should have read the emails more carefully. I missed the fact
that there were two different proposals. It was
On 2025-Mar-16, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 3:38 PM Álvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > I forgot to send a note here that I pushed this patch. Thank you.
>
> I'm confused. Tom and I both said we didn't like this change, so you
> committed the patch without further discussion?
Tom did
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 3:38 PM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> I forgot to send a note here that I pushed this patch. Thank you.
I'm confused. Tom and I both said we didn't like this change, so you
committed the patch without further discussion?
I mean, this is a pretty unimportant detail, so I don't
On 2025-Mar-01, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> I propose the following change to the generation script,
> generate-lwlocknames.pl
>
> -print $h "#define ${lockname}Lock (&MainLWLockArray[$lockidx].lock)\n";
> +printf $h "#define %-30s %s\n", "${lockname}Lock",
> "(&MainLWLockArray[$lockidx].lock)
On 2025-Mar-01, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> I propose the following change to the generation script,
> generate-lwlocknames.pl
>
> -print $h "#define ${lockname}Lock (&MainLWLockArray[$lockidx].lock)\n";
> +printf $h "#define %-30s %s\n", "${lockname}Lock",
> "(&MainLWLockArray[$lockidx].lock
On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 1:10 AM Gurjeet Singh wrote:
> I propose the following change to the generation script,
> generate-lwlocknames.pl
>
> -print $h "#define ${lockname}Lock (&MainLWLockArray[$lockidx].lock)\n";
> +printf $h "#define %-30s %s\n", "${lockname}Lock",
> "(&MainLWLockArray
Gurjeet Singh writes:
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2025 at 10:26 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> This looks reasonably in line with project style ...
> Should I create a commitfest entry for this patch, or is it
> uncontroversial enough and small enough to not warrant that?
The controversy would be more about whethe
On Sat, Mar 1, 2025 at 10:26 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Gurjeet Singh writes:
> > I propose the following change to the generation script,
> > generate-lwlocknames.pl
> > ...
> > which produces the lock names in this format
>
> > #define ShmemIndexLock (&MainLWLockArray[1].lock)
> > #
Gurjeet Singh writes:
> I propose the following change to the generation script,
> generate-lwlocknames.pl
> ...
> which produces the lock names in this format
> #define ShmemIndexLock (&MainLWLockArray[1].lock)
> #define OidGenLock (&MainLWLockArray[2].lock)
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
