Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgbf(at)twiska(dot)com, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view
Date: 2020-07-11 21:26:30
Message-ID: 20200711212630.GA6825@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-Jul-11, Tom Lane wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2020-Jul-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I think we should define InvalidXLogSegNo to be ~((uint64)0) and add a
> >> macro to test for that.
> > That's overkill really. I just used zero. Running
> > contrib/test_decoding under valgrind, this now passes.
> > I think I'd rather do away with the compare to zero, and initialize to
> > something else in GetWALAvailability, though. What we're doing seems
> > unclean and unclear.
> Is zero really not a valid segment number?

No, but you cannot retreat from that ...

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2020-07-11 22:03:22 Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-07-11 19:59:12 Re: output columns of \dAo and \dAp