On 03/26/18 12:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> If that's the argument, why is the WALInsertLockUpdateInsertingAt(CurrPos)
> call still there? GetXLogBuffer() would do that too.
"Because I hadn't noticed that," he said, sheepishly.
> In any case, the new comment ... fails to
> explain what's going on, and the reference to a function that is not
> actually called from the vicinity of the comment ...
> suggest something like "GetXLogBuffer() will fetch and initialize the
> next WAL page for us. ... worth explaining how you know that the new
> page's header is short not long.
Here are patches responding to that (and also fixing the unintended
inclusion of .travis.yml).
What I have not done here is respond to Michael's objection, which
I haven't had time to think more about yet.
-Chap
