MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAP53PkzdBK8VJ1fS4AZ481LgMN8f9mJiC39ZRHqkFUSYq6KWmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <h7zq426fhzt3oqkps53qxfwl3dlz3ifcwqmybuvxntlcaqwb33@m6huopxovgle>
 <CAP53Pkw1RpyAVsvJwUOMgGnVoQUibMk+EB+w-8WqY8kzsC4WjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP53Pkz-BmkLFJ+sAcr8H1sBPtWp8WYGzorH9yw+W5Tn0yH0sg@mail.gmail.com>
 <mflexfbmbkmql5snr322ldu72dfnjr2dntxx3ippaz4tcso7vl@zmxxgiws3qux>
 <CAP53PkzZ3UotnRrrnXWAv=F4avRq9MQ8zU+bxoN9tpovEu6fGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <k2uxwancbi5blb2duny3kbuz667m47hqc4jv7xstlx3yyzcd3a@fjqww6avalt3> <CAHut+Put94CTpjQsqOJHdHkgJ2ZXq+qVSfMEcmDKLiWLW-hPfA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHut+Put94CTpjQsqOJHdHkgJ2ZXq+qVSfMEcmDKLiWLW-hPfA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lukas Fittl <lukas@fittl.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:34:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP53PkyOvXC7pWAiamvWth_JNeb=isrxX+PJT0pw_Hw5Czzf+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Stack-based tracking of per-node WAL/buffer usage
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, 
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAP53PkyOvXC7pWAiamvWth_JNeb%3DisrxX%2BPJT0pw_Hw5Czzf%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 2:06=E2=80=AFPM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
> I happened to be reading the code in this recent push [1] and saw this
> new macro:
>
> +#define INSTR_TIME_LT(x,y) \
> + ((x).ticks > (y).ticks)
>
> Is that macro name OK? It seemed backwards to me. Shouldn't it be
> called INSTR_TIME_GT because it is checking that x is "Greater Than"
> y?

Oh yeah, good catch. I think I must have thought of "larger than"
instead of "less than".

I think adjusting that to INSTR_TIME_GT makes sense, and is consistent
with how "lt" and "gt" is used elsewhere in the source.

Thanks,
Lukas

--
Lukas Fittl