On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 01:00:06PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2025, at 11:45, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Dunno what others think, this seems useless churn to me.
>
> I agree, I don't see this providing enough value to warrant the changes.
Same here, let's leave things as they are.
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 5:30 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 9 Jan 2025, at 11:45, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > Dunno what others think, this seems useless churn to me.
>
> I agree, I don't see this providing enough value to warrant the changes.
>
I agree about most of the changes however
> On 9 Jan 2025, at 11:45, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Dunno what others think, this seems useless churn to me.
I agree, I don't see this providing enough value to warrant the changes.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On 2025-Jan-09, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> Sorry for reviewing late. The patch looks ok.
Dunno what others think, this seems useless churn to me.
> I found some more
> static const struct
> {
> LOCKMODE hwlock;
> int lockstatus;
> int updstatus;
> }
>
> tupleLockExtraInfo[MaxLockTupleMode + 1] =
>
On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 4:00 PM Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> Thanks for review!
>
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 14:31, Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 1:55 PM Kirill Reshke wrote:
> > >
> > > I hate to be "that guy", but there are many places in sources where we use
> > > LOCKMODE lo
Thanks for review!
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 14:31, Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 1:55 PM Kirill Reshke wrote:
> >
> > I hate to be "that guy", but there are many places in sources where we use
> > LOCKMODE lockmode; variable and exactly one where we use LOCKMODE
> > lmode: it is
On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 1:55 PM Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> I hate to be "that guy", but there are many places in sources where we use
> LOCKMODE lockmode; variable and exactly one where we use LOCKMODE
> lmode: it is vacuum_open_relation function.
There are more instances of LOCKMODE lmode; I spotte
I hate to be "that guy", but there are many places in sources where we use
LOCKMODE lockmode; variable and exactly one where we use LOCKMODE
lmode: it is vacuum_open_relation function.
Is it worth a patch?
v1-0001-Rename-vacuum_open_relation-argument-to-lockmode.patch
Description: Binary data
