Re: WAL consistency check facility - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: WAL consistency check facility
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqSvgt0WHLCUGxSsVeuPKAknkyY_Wd2PtSBLDAuBdwiKQw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL consistency check facility  (Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not getting why we should introduce a new redo action and return
> from the function beforehand.

Per my last email, same conclusion from here :)
Sorry if I am picky and noisy on many points, I am trying to think
about the value of each change introduced in this patch, particularly
if they are meaningful, can be improved in some way, or can be
simplified and make the code more simple.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kuntal Ghosh
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL consistency check facility
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL consistency check facility