Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
| От | Amit Kapila |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAA4eK1KCOU1D1-8s-eQPtXMshe=GFPbhhKJrO2vB-FVRRWA9FA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
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)));
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.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: