[MASSMAIL]Fix parameters order for relation_copy_for_cluster
От | Japin Li |
---|---|
Тема | [MASSMAIL]Fix parameters order for relation_copy_for_cluster |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ME3P282MB3166860D4911AE82F92DF7C5B63F2@ME3P282MB3166.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Fix parameters order for relation_copy_for_cluster
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, When attempting to implement a new table access method, I discovered that relation_copy_for_cluster() has the following declaration: void (*relation_copy_for_cluster) (Relation NewTable, Relation OldTable, Relation OldIndex, bool use_sort, TransactionId OldestXmin, TransactionId *xid_cutoff, MultiXactId *multi_cutoff, double *num_tuples, double *tups_vacuumed, double *tups_recently_dead); It claims that the first parameter is a new table, and the second one is an old table. However, the table_relation_copy_for_cluster() uses the first parameter as the old table, and the second as a new table, see below: static inline void table_relation_copy_for_cluster(Relation OldTable, Relation NewTable, Relation OldIndex, bool use_sort, TransactionId OldestXmin, TransactionId *xid_cutoff, MultiXactId *multi_cutoff, double *num_tuples, double *tups_vacuumed, double *tups_recently_dead) { OldTable->rd_tableam->relation_copy_for_cluster(OldTable, NewTable, OldIndex, use_sort, OldestXmin, xid_cutoff, multi_cutoff, num_tuples, tups_vacuumed, tups_recently_dead); } It's a bit confusing, so attach a patch to fix this. -- Regards, Japin Li
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: