Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification
Date
Msg-id CAH2-WzkXR3CvxJNr6Ewsn9Oo--REZNuML-wjJ_YS9Pp-dXYX5g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] A design for amcheck heapam verification
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> I'm just saying that there should be two functions here, rather than dropping the old definition, and creating s new
onewith a default argument.
 

So you're asking for something like bt_index_check_heap() +
bt_index_parent_check_heap()? Or, are you talking about function
overloading?

-- 
Peter Geoghegan


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] adding simple sock check for windows
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: some last patches breaks plan cache