Participants
Japin Li
Japin Li
Chao Li
Chao Li
Attachments
Download Latest Patchset
+2-3
Show all attachments
Thread Outline
#1Japin LiJapin Li
Mar 13, 07:05
#2Chao Li↳Chao Lito Japin Li (#1)
Mar 13, 07:29
#3Japin Li↳Japin Lito Chao Li (#2)
Mar 14, 03:07
#4Chao Li↳Chao Lito Japin Li (#3)
Mar 16, 00:50
#5Japin Li↳Japin Lito Chao Li (#4)
Mar 16, 02:31
#6Chao Li↳Chao Lito Japin Li (#5)
Mar 16, 03:14

Use SMgrRelation instead of SMgrRelationData * in pgaio_io_set_target_smgr()

Started by Japin Liabout 1 month ago6 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Japin Li
Japin Li
japinli@hotmail.com

Hi, hackers

While reading smgr.h, I noticed an inconsistent type usage in
pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(). Currently the function is declared as:

extern void pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(PgAioHandle *ioh,
SMgrRelationData *smgr,
ForkNumber forknum,
BlockNumber blocknum,
int nblocks,

However, SMgrRelation is defined as "typedef SMgrRelationData * SMgrRelation;",
and all other functions in the smgr subsystem use SMgrRelation as the parameter
type.

To keep the code consistent with the rest of the smgr API, this patch changes
the parameter from SMgrRelationData * to SMgrRelation in both the definition
and declaration.

This is purely a style/consistency cleanup with no functional change.

Thoughts? Is this change acceptable?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

Attachments:

v1-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patchtext/x-patchDownload+2-3
#2Chao Li
Chao Li
li.evan.chao@gmail.com
In reply to: Japin Li (#1)
Re: Use SMgrRelation instead of SMgrRelationData * in pgaio_io_set_target_smgr()

On Mar 13, 2026, at 15:05, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, hackers

While reading smgr.h, I noticed an inconsistent type usage in
pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(). Currently the function is declared as:

extern void pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(PgAioHandle *ioh,
SMgrRelationData *smgr,
ForkNumber forknum,
BlockNumber blocknum,
int nblocks,

However, SMgrRelation is defined as "typedef SMgrRelationData * SMgrRelation;",
and all other functions in the smgr subsystem use SMgrRelation as the parameter
type.

To keep the code consistent with the rest of the smgr API, this patch changes
the parameter from SMgrRelationData * to SMgrRelation in both the definition
and declaration.

This is purely a style/consistency cleanup with no functional change.

Thoughts? Is this change acceptable?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v1-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

pgaio_io_set_target_smgr doesn’t update smgr, so, instead of “SMgrRelation”, I think it’s better to change the type to "const SMgrRelationData *”.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

#3Japin Li
Japin Li
japinli@hotmail.com
In reply to: Chao Li (#2)
Re: Use SMgrRelation instead of SMgrRelationData * in pgaio_io_set_target_smgr()

Hi, Chao

On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 at 15:29, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 13, 2026, at 15:05, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, hackers

While reading smgr.h, I noticed an inconsistent type usage in
pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(). Currently the function is declared as:

extern void pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(PgAioHandle *ioh,
SMgrRelationData *smgr,
ForkNumber forknum,
BlockNumber blocknum,
int nblocks,

However, SMgrRelation is defined as "typedef SMgrRelationData * SMgrRelation;",
and all other functions in the smgr subsystem use SMgrRelation as the parameter
type.

To keep the code consistent with the rest of the smgr API, this patch changes
the parameter from SMgrRelationData * to SMgrRelation in both the definition
and declaration.

This is purely a style/consistency cleanup with no functional change.

Thoughts? Is this change acceptable?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v1-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

pgaio_io_set_target_smgr doesn’t update smgr, so, instead of “SMgrRelation”, I think it’s better to change the type to "const SMgrRelationData *”.

Thanks for the review! Makes sense — I've updated the patch to v2.

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

Attachments:

v2-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patchtext/x-patchDownload+2-3
#4Chao Li
Chao Li
li.evan.chao@gmail.com
In reply to: Japin Li (#3)
Re: Use SMgrRelation instead of SMgrRelationData * in pgaio_io_set_target_smgr()

On Mar 14, 2026, at 11:07, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, Chao

On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 at 15:29, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 13, 2026, at 15:05, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, hackers

While reading smgr.h, I noticed an inconsistent type usage in
pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(). Currently the function is declared as:

extern void pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(PgAioHandle *ioh,
SMgrRelationData *smgr,
ForkNumber forknum,
BlockNumber blocknum,
int nblocks,

However, SMgrRelation is defined as "typedef SMgrRelationData * SMgrRelation;",
and all other functions in the smgr subsystem use SMgrRelation as the parameter
type.

To keep the code consistent with the rest of the smgr API, this patch changes
the parameter from SMgrRelationData * to SMgrRelation in both the definition
and declaration.

This is purely a style/consistency cleanup with no functional change.

Thoughts? Is this change acceptable?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v1-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

pgaio_io_set_target_smgr doesn’t update smgr, so, instead of “SMgrRelation”, I think it’s better to change the type to "const SMgrRelationData *”.

Thanks for the review! Makes sense — I've updated the patch to v2.

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v2-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

“const SMgrRelation *” will not work as you expected, you have to do “const SMgrRelationData *”. We want to protect the data the pointer pointing to from changing but the pointer itself.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

#5Japin Li
Japin Li
japinli@hotmail.com
In reply to: Chao Li (#4)
Re: Use SMgrRelation instead of SMgrRelationData * in pgaio_io_set_target_smgr()

On Mon, 16 Mar 2026 at 08:50, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 14, 2026, at 11:07, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, Chao

On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 at 15:29, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 13, 2026, at 15:05, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, hackers

While reading smgr.h, I noticed an inconsistent type usage in
pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(). Currently the function is declared as:

extern void pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(PgAioHandle *ioh,
SMgrRelationData *smgr,
ForkNumber forknum,
BlockNumber blocknum,
int nblocks,

However, SMgrRelation is defined as "typedef SMgrRelationData * SMgrRelation;",
and all other functions in the smgr subsystem use SMgrRelation as the parameter
type.

To keep the code consistent with the rest of the smgr API, this patch changes
the parameter from SMgrRelationData * to SMgrRelation in both the definition
and declaration.

This is purely a style/consistency cleanup with no functional change.

Thoughts? Is this change acceptable?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v1-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

pgaio_io_set_target_smgr doesn’t update smgr, so, instead of “SMgrRelation”, I think it’s better to change the type to "const SMgrRelationData *”.

Thanks for the review! Makes sense — I've updated the patch to v2.

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v2-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

“const SMgrRelation *” will not work as you expected, you have to do “const SMgrRelationData *”. We want to protect the data the pointer pointing to from changing but the pointer itself.

Thanks for pointing that out! I hadn't noticed the difference before.
Updated as you suggested.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

Attachments:

v3-0001-Add-the-const-qualifier-to-the-SMgrRelationData-p.patchtext/x-patchDownload+2-3
#6Chao Li
Chao Li
li.evan.chao@gmail.com
In reply to: Japin Li (#5)
Re: Use SMgrRelation instead of SMgrRelationData * in pgaio_io_set_target_smgr()

On Mar 16, 2026, at 10:31, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 16 Mar 2026 at 08:50, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 14, 2026, at 11:07, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, Chao

On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 at 15:29, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 13, 2026, at 15:05, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi, hackers

While reading smgr.h, I noticed an inconsistent type usage in
pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(). Currently the function is declared as:

extern void pgaio_io_set_target_smgr(PgAioHandle *ioh,
SMgrRelationData *smgr,
ForkNumber forknum,
BlockNumber blocknum,
int nblocks,

However, SMgrRelation is defined as "typedef SMgrRelationData * SMgrRelation;",
and all other functions in the smgr subsystem use SMgrRelation as the parameter
type.

To keep the code consistent with the rest of the smgr API, this patch changes
the parameter from SMgrRelationData * to SMgrRelation in both the definition
and declaration.

This is purely a style/consistency cleanup with no functional change.

Thoughts? Is this change acceptable?

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v1-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

pgaio_io_set_target_smgr doesn’t update smgr, so, instead of “SMgrRelation”, I think it’s better to change the type to "const SMgrRelationData *”.

Thanks for the review! Makes sense — I've updated the patch to v2.

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v2-0001-Use-SMgrRelation-instead-of-SMgrRelationData-in-p.patch>

“const SMgrRelation *” will not work as you expected, you have to do “const SMgrRelationData *”. We want to protect the data the pointer pointing to from changing but the pointer itself.

Thanks for pointing that out! I hadn't noticed the difference before.
Updated as you suggested.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

--
Regards,
Japin Li
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.

<v3-0001-Add-the-const-qualifier-to-the-SMgrRelationData-p.patch>

V3 LGTM.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/

← Back to Topics