Re: pageinspect patch, for showing tuple data - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Nikolay Shaplov
<n.shaplov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> В письме от 28 октября 2015 16:57:36 пользователь Michael Paquier написал:
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 1:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 5:15 AM, Nikolay Shaplov wrote:
>> >> Or it's ready to commit, and just not marked this way?
>> >
>> > No, I don't think we have reached this state yet.
>> >
>> >> I am going to make report based on this patch in Vienna. It would be
>> >> nice to have it committed until then :)
>> >
>> > This is registered in this November's CF and the current one is not
>> > completely wrapped up, so I haven't rushed into looking at it.
>>
>> So, I have finally been able to look at this patch in more details,
>> resulting in the attached. I noticed a couple of things that should be
>> addressed, mainly:
>> - addition of a new routine text_to_bits to perform the reverse
>> operation of bits_to_text. This was previously part of
>> tuple_data_split, I think that it deserves its own function.
>> - split_tuple_data should be static
>> - t_bits_str should not be a text, rather a char* fetched using
>> text_to_cstring(PG_GETARG_TEXT_PP(4)). This way there is no need to
>> perform extra calculations with VARSIZE and VARHDRSZ
>> - split_tuple_data can directly use the relation OID instead of the
>> tuple descriptor of the relation
>> - t_bits was leaking memory. For correctness I think that it is better
>> to free it after calling split_tuple_data.
>> - PG_DETOAST_DATUM_COPY allocates some memory, this was leaking as
>> well in raw_attr actually. I refactored the code such as a bytea* is
>> used and always freed when allocated to avoid leaks. Removing raw_attr
>> actually simplified the code a bit.
>> - I simplified the docs, that was largely too verbose in my opinion.
>> - Instead of using VARATT_IS_1B_E and VARTAG_EXTERNAL, using
>> VARATT_IS_EXTERNAL and VARATT_IS_EXTERNAL_ONDISK seems more adapted to
>> me, those other ones are much more low-level and not really spread in
>> the backend code.
>> - Found some typos in the code, the docs and some comments. I reworked
>> the error messages as well.
>> - The code format was not really in line with the project guidelines.
>> I fixed that as well.
>> - I removed heap_page_item_attrs for now to get this patch in a
>> bare-bone state. Though I would not mind if this is re-added (I
>> personally don't think that's much necessary in the module
>> actually...).
>> - The calculation of the length of t_bits using HEAP_NATTS_MASK is
>> more correct as you mentioned earlier, so I let it in its state.
>> That's actually more accurate for error handling as well.
>> That's everything I recall I have. How does this look?
> You've completely rewrite everything ;-)
>
> Let everything be the way you wrote. This code is better than mine.
>
> With one exception. I really  need heap_page_item_attrs function. I used it in
> my Tuples Internals presentation
> https://github.com/dhyannataraj/tuple-internals-presentation
> and I am 100% sure that this function is needed for educational purposes, and
> this function should be as simple as possible, so students can use it without
> extra efforts.

Fine. That's your patch after all.

> I still have an opinion that documentation should be more verbose, than your
> version, but I can accept your version.

I am not sure that's necessary, pageinspect is for developers.

> Who is going to add heap_page_item_attrs to your patch? me or you?

I recall some parts of the code I still did not like much :) I'll grab
some room to have an extra look at it.
--
Michael