Re: Possible bug in logical replication. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Possible bug in logical replication.
Date
Msg-id 20180719031814.GG3411@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Possible bug in logical replication.  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Possible bug in logical replication.  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:45:27PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Jul-19, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 02:30:53PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> > In the immortal words of Julian Bream: "yeah, I didn't like any of
>> > that".
>>
>> One wikipedia lookup later, I still don't know where this quote comes
>> from, but at least I understand who the man is.
>
> https://twitter.com/alvherre/status/1019652397306703873
>
> OK, maybe not that "immortal" after all.

:)

>> This is referring to the system catalog field in pg_replication_slots.
>
> Yeah, I think that's a bit misleading.  (I very frequently do a tag-jump
> on identifiers in comments, and it's uncomfortable that in this case it
> jumps to the Docbook source rather than to the struct declaration.)

Okay, this makes sense as well and that's easier to grep.

>>> +      gotrecord = XLogReadRecord(ctx->reader, startlsn, &errm) != NULL;
>>
>> I would put parenthesis for clarity.
>
> Or just put it back as a record pointer.

I am fine either way if you want to have the last call.  So please feel
free to choose what you prefer here.  That's no big deal.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: More consistency for some file-related error message
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Have an encrypted pgpass file