Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view
Date
Msg-id 20200711212630.GA6825@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2020-Jul-11, Tom Lane wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2020-Jul-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I think we should define InvalidXLogSegNo to be ~((uint64)0) and add a
> >> macro to test for that.
> 
> > That's overkill really.  I just used zero.  Running
> > contrib/test_decoding under valgrind, this now passes.
> 
> > I think I'd rather do away with the compare to zero, and initialize to
> > something else in GetWALAvailability, though.  What we're doing seems
> > unclean and unclear.
> 
> Is zero really not a valid segment number?

No, but you cannot retreat from that ...

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: output columns of \dAo and \dAp
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend