Re: Incorrect overflow check condition for WAL segment size

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh(dot)2007(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Incorrect overflow check condition for WAL segment size
Date: 2016-11-08 06:01:05
Message-ID: CAB7nPqRxaf_7uNckNTn58kto1U8pk72nunW+G5C-RqT43p0+8w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2016-11-08 06:31:10 Re: Re: BUG #13755: pgwin32_is_service not checking if SECURITY_SERVICE_SID is disabled
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-11-08 05:56:03 Re: Re: BUG #13755: pgwin32_is_service not checking if SECURITY_SERVICE_SID is disabled