Re: Instrument checkpoint sync calls

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>   
>> patch I submit.  Doesn't seem worth going through the trouble of committing
>> that minor rework on its own, I'll slip it into the next useful thing that
>> touches this area I do.  Thanks for the hint, this would work better than
>> what I did.
>>     
>
> Well, if I'm the one committing it, I'll pull that part out again and
> commit it separately.  Not sure if that affects your calculus, but I
> much prefer patches that don't try to do ancillary things along the
> way.
>   

I meant that I'd bundle it into the block of time I spend on that, and 
likely submit with something else that touches the same area.  Obviously 
the correction patch would be better on its own when being handed over 
to a committer.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support        www.2ndQuadrant.us
"PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books