On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>> I got the same thought, wondering as well if get_slot_xmins should be
>> renamed check_slot_xmins with the is() tests moved inside it as well.
>> Not sure if that's worth the API ugliness though.
>
> Mmm, doesn't seem like that's worth doing, but I'm half tempted to merge
> wait_slot_xmins into get_slot_xmins so you can't skip it ...
Let's do that please. Merging both was my first feeling when
refactoring this test upthread. Should I send a patch?
--
Michael
