From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_replication_origin_xact_reset() and its argument variables |
Date: | 2016-07-01 22:01:08 |
Message-ID: | 10635.1467410468@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2016-06-30 10:14:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> As far as I read the code of the function, those arguments don't seem to
>>> be necessary. So I'm afraid that the pg_proc entry for the function might
>>> be incorrect and those two arguments should be removed from the definition.
>> Sure looks that way from here. Copy-and-paste from the previous
>> line in pg_proc.h, perhaps?
> Yes, that's clearly wrong. Damn. Can't fix that for 9.5 anymore. The
> function isn't all that important (especially not from SQL), but still,
> that's annoying. I'm inclined to just remove the args in 9.6. We could
> also add a note to the 9.5 docs, adding that the arguments are there by
> error?
Yeah, seems like the best thing to do.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-07-01 22:05:46 | Re: Broken handling of lwlocknames.h |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-07-01 21:51:51 | Re: pg_replication_origin_xact_reset() and its argument variables |