Thank you. I prefer to keep the comments of these three functions
DecodeInsert(),
DecodeUpdate(), and
DecodeDelete() aligned.
```
/*
* Parse XLOG_HEAP_INSERT (not MULTI_INSERT!) records into tuplebufs.
*
* Inserts can contain the new tuple.
*/
static void
DecodeInsert(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx, XLogRecordBuffer *buf)
/*
* Parse XLOG_HEAP_UPDATE and XLOG_HEAP_HOT_UPDATE, which have the same layout
* in the record, from wal into proper tuplebufs.
*
* Updates can possibly contain a new tuple and the old primary key.
*/
static void
DecodeUpdate(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx, XLogRecordBuffer *buf)
/*
* Parse XLOG_HEAP_DELETE from wal into proper tuplebufs.
*
* Deletes can possibly contain the old primary key.
*/
static void
DecodeDelete(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx, XLogRecordBuffer *buf)
```
Best wishes
Yongtao Huang
Hi all,
I think the comment above the function DecodeInsert() in src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c should be
+ * Inserts can contain the new tuple.
, rather than
- * Deletes can contain the new tuple.
Nice catch. +1.
I kind of wonder if it would be clearer to state that "XLOG_HEAP_INSERT
can contain the new tuple", in order to differentiate it from
XLOG_HEAP2_MULTI_INSERT.
Thanks
Richard
