Re: [PATCH] XLogReader v2
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] XLogReader v2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26913.1347216038@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] XLogReader v2 (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] XLogReader v2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On Tuesday, September 04, 2012 09:33:54 PM Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> * There are way too many #ifdef VERBOSE_DEBUG stuff for my taste. It >> might look better if you had macros such as elog_debug() that are defined >> to empty if VERBOSE_DEBUG is not defined. (The problem with such an >> approach is that you have to get into the business of creating one macro >> for each different param count, so elog_debug1(), elog_debug2() and so >> on. It also means you have to count the number of args in each call to >> ensure you're calling the right one.) > Hm. I am generally not very happy with the logging as is. I don't want to rely > on elog() at all because that means the code suddently depends on just about > the whole backend which sucks (see my god ulgy makefile hack for that...). elog/ereport are already basically macros. Can't they be redefined for use in a standalone program, with just minimal backing code? > If we were to use that approach is there a platform that stops us from using > vararg macros? I *think* it is C99... C90 is still the project standard, and this is a pretty lame reason to want to change it. >> * In the code beautification front, there are a number of cuddled braces >> and improperly indented function declarations. > I never seem to get those right. I really tried to make a pass over the whole > file correcting them... Install pgindent? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: