From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
        Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
        Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>, nasbyj@amazon.com,
        Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
        Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
        PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Improve autovacuum logging for aggressive and
 anti-wraparound ru
In-reply-to: <20181002065508.GC17642@paquier.xyz>
References: <23209391537822541@iva4-6d7004ac8463.qloud-c.yandex.net>
 <20180924211117.tpwxemzd3372nagj@alvherre.pgsql>
 <CAD21AoAV17jQH6__E8_VQePms4NptX0X50U=98qJ5RNV7au1iw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181002001151.GP11712@paquier.xyz>
 <CAD21AoB-nhVxo=6__BeukNniHnt6UGMKRs3v=Zkn-WJq9kx+4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181002065508.GC17642@paquier.xyz>
Comments: In-reply-to Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
	message dated "Tue, 02 Oct 2018 15:55:08 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <337.1538489728.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 10:15:28 -0400
Message-ID: <338.1538489728@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> My brain is rather fried for the rest of the day...  But we could just
> be looking at using USE_ASSERT_CHECKING.  Thoughts from other are
> welcome.

I'd go with folding the condition into a plain Assert.  Then it's
obvious that no code is added in a non-assert build.  I can see that
some cases might be so complicated that that isn't nice, but this
case doesn't seem to qualify.

			regards, tom lane