On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 8:01 AM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
> The patchset looks good to me. I made some minor corrections.
>
> 0003 Removed extra check in WaitLSNCleanup() as deleteLSNWaiter()
> already does it.
> 0005 Improved comment about the situation on when LSN can go backwards.
Thanks for the corrections! LGTM. For patch 0005, I was initially
hesitant to add a new test module because it may seem somewhat heavy
just to test this issue. I ended up adding it after realizing that it
could also be reused to test another, as-yet-unreported issue.
I'm still wondering when it is appropriate to introduce a new test
module like this. I'm also not quite sure when a TAP test is warranted
instead of just providing a reproducer, since I spent a lot of time
designing this test. I'd like to hear your thoughts on them.
BTW, there are a few potential issues I've been investigating for a
while, but the fixes and constraints are still not entirely clear to
me, so I plan to send an off-list email about them later.
--
Regards,
Xuneng Zhou
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
