Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoY5479ySMAzqu4fZPr65woURyM7GqzaR3L-von3MCN2WA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> wrote: > On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 12:58:47 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.darold@dalibo.com> wrote: > >> All patches you've submitted on tha v13 patch have been applied and >> are present in attached v14 of the patch. I have not included the >> patches about GUC changes because I'm not sure that adding a new file >> (include/utils/guc_values.h) just for that will be accepted or that it >> will not require a more global work to add other GUC values. However >> perhaps this patch can be submitted separately if the decision is not >> taken here. > > Understood. I've a couple of other patches that do > a little cleanup on master that I'd also like to submit > along with your patch. This on the theory that > the maintainers will be looking at this code anyway > because your patch touches it. All this can be submitted > for their review at once. My approach is to be minimally invasive on > a per-patch basis (i.e. your patch) but add small patches > that make existing code "better" without touching > functionality. (Deleting unnecessary statements, etc.) > The overall goal being a better code base. It would really be much better to submit anything that's not absolutely necessary for the new feature as a separate patch, rather than bundling things together. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: