Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Kapila
Тема Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Дата
Msg-id CAA4eK1JPc75fRtrZVcqG2TYCK9_c7j4nCLme+yc8o6wqG_mP6g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Also couple of minor comments from me.

I think this

+ StrNCpy(LWLockTrancheRequestArray[LWLockTrancheRequestsCount].tranche_name, tranche_name, strlen(tranche_name) + 1);

should be 

+ StrNCpy(LWLockTrancheRequestArray[LWLockTrancheRequestsCount].tranche_name, tranche_name, sizeof(LWLockTrancheRequestArray[LWLockTrancheRequestsCount].tranche_name));


I think you are right, otherwise it might try to copy more, how
about

StrNCpy(LWLockTrancheRequestArray[LWLockTrancheRequestsCount].tranche_name, tranche_name, Min (strlen(tranche_name) + 1, sizeof(LWLockTrancheRequestArray[LWLockTrancheRequestsCount].tranche_name)));


Changed as per your suggestion, rather than using Min,
because I saw most code places uses directly sizeof for
StrNCpy(), so lets be consistent.
 
 
And as far as I know english "it's" should be "its" in the sentence below.

+     from <function>_PG_init</>.  Tranche repersents an array of LWLocks and
+     can be accessed by it's name.  First parameter <literal>tranche_name</>


Right, will change.


Fixed.


With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: