Horton

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] pageinspect function to decode infomasks

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2019-09-14T09:30:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 03:03:57PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:18:37AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Won't 'Lateral' clause be helpful here as the patch contains it in one
>> of its tests?
> 
> Ah true, I forgot that.

If we are redesigning the interface, here are two extra thoughts which
may be worth considering:
1) If the function returns multiple columns, could it make sense to
separate infomask and infomask2?  This would then give 3 columns:
- The raw flags for infomask.
- The three combined flags for infomask.
- The flags for infomask2.
2) Could it make sense to have a separate function for infomask2?

I'd rather keep everything in a single function, still as we are
discussing the matter..
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Redesign pageinspect function printing infomask bits

  2. Add to pageinspect function to make t_infomask/t_infomask2 human-readable

  3. Improve documentation of pageinspect

  4. Improve pageinspect module