Re: remove more archiving overhead - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kyotaro Horiguchi
Subject Re: remove more archiving overhead
Date
Msg-id 20220708.105652.1551158050191356887.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: remove more archiving overhead  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: remove more archiving overhead
List pgsql-hackers
At Thu, 7 Jul 2022 15:07:16 -0700, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote in 
> Here's an updated patch.

Thinking RFC'ish, the meaning of "may" and "must" is significant in
this description.  On the other hand it uses both "may" and "can" but
I thinkthat their difference is not significant or "can" there is
somewhat confusing.  I think the "can" should be "may" here.

And since "must" is emphasized, doesn't "may" also needs emphasis?

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns
Next
From: Yugo NAGATA
Date:
Subject: Re: Add a test for "cannot truncate foreign table"