| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | sirisha chamarthi <sirichamarthi22(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fix GetWALAvailability function code comments for WALAVAIL_REMOVED return value |
| Date: | 2023-01-19 23:43:52 |
| Message-ID: | 291749.1674171832@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
sirisha chamarthi <sirichamarthi22(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 7:59 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>> In short, the proposed fix alone seems fine to me. If we want to show
>> further details, I would add a bit as follows.
>>
>> | * * WALAVAIL_REMOVED means it has been removed. A replication stream on
>> | * a slot with this LSN cannot continue. Note that the affected
>> | * processes have been terminated by checkpointer, too.
> Thanks for your comments! Attached the patch with your suggestions.
Pushed with a bit of additional wordsmithing. I thought "have been"
was a bit too strong of an assertion considering that this function
does not pay any attention to the actual state of any processes,
so I made it say "should have been".
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2023-01-19 23:44:22 | Re: Experiments with Postgres and SSL |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2023-01-19 23:41:29 | Re: Use appendStringInfoSpaces more |