Re: Incorrect overflow check condition for WAL segment size

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Incorrect overflow check condition for WAL segment size
Date: 2016-11-08 17:12:39
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaxXbzLSmJeH9zw9cBN0u7BoyuLFOyy5t1BDVganBCy5w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Either the comment is wrongly written or the check for overflow
>> condition has to be fixed. Assuming the overflow check condition to be
>> erroneous, I've attached a patch to fix this.
>
> Good catch. Interesting copy-pasto from 88e9823.

Committed.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2016-11-08 17:26:41 Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-11-08 16:46:25 Re: Improving RLS planning