Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 at 20:16, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 3:11 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This small cleanup patch updates src/bin/pg_waldump/archive_waldump.c
> > to use the recently introduced XLogRecPtrIsValid() helper instead of
> > negating XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(). The current code uses double-negative
> > checks such as:
> > Assert(!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->startptr));
> > if (!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->endptr))
> >
> > This patch changes them to:
> > Assert(XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->startptr));
> > if (XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->endptr))
> >
> > This improves readability without changing behavior. The attached
> > patch has the changes for the same.
>
> Commit a2b02293bc6 switched various places to use XLogRecPtrIsValid(),
> but it looks like later commits accidentally introduced uses of
> XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() again. So +1 for this change.
>
> Also, that commit replaced direct comparisons with InvalidXLogRecPtr with
> XLogRecPtrIsValid(). I noticed two such comparisons [1]. Should these be
> updated as well?

I felt these also should be updated, the attached v2 version patch
includes the changes for the same.

Regards,
Vignesh