Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Smith
Subject Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
Date
Msg-id CAHut+PvQnLa6Wu+LYhApw7Zfvj+R9UzOyD_YbbG9bQ-h_d6MDA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 11:45 PM Tomas Vondra
<tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/27/23 23:06, Peter Smith wrote:
> > FWIW, here are some more minor review comments for v20231127-3-0001
> >
> > ======
> > .../replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
> >
> > 3.
> > + *   To decide if a sequence change is transactional, we maintain a hash
> > + *   table of relfilenodes created in each (sub)transactions, along with
> > + *   the XID of the (sub)transaction that created the relfilenode. The
> > + *   entries from substransactions are copied to the top-level transaction
> > + *   to make checks cheaper. The hash table gets cleaned up when the
> > + *   transaction completes (commit/abort).
> >
> > /substransactions/subtransactions/
> >
>
> Will fix.

FYI - I think this typo still exists in the patch v20231128-0001.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: Extra periods in pg_dump messages
Next
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: Re: about help message for new pg_dump's --filter option