Thread: Typo for xl_running_xacts

Hi, hackers

I find some typo about xl_running_xacts in comments.
Attached a patch to fix those.

-- 
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.

diff --git a/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c b/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c
index 5006a5c464..44d94bf656 100644
--- a/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c
+++ b/src/backend/replication/logical/snapbuild.c
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@
  * Initially the machinery is in the START stage. When an xl_running_xacts
  * record is read that is sufficiently new (above the safe xmin horizon),
  * there's a state transition. If there were no running xacts when the
- * running_xacts record was generated, we'll directly go into CONSISTENT
+ * xl_running_xacts record was generated, we'll directly go into CONSISTENT
  * state, otherwise we'll switch to the BUILDING_SNAPSHOT state. Having a full
  * snapshot means that all transactions that start henceforth can be decoded
  * in their entirety, but transactions that started previously can't. In
@@ -1331,7 +1331,7 @@ SnapBuildFindSnapshot(SnapBuild *builder, XLogRecPtr lsn, xl_running_xacts *runn
      */
 
     /*
-     * xl_running_xact record is older than what we can use, we might not have
+     * xl_running_xacts record is older than what we can use, we might not have
      * all necessary catalog rows anymore.
      */
     if (TransactionIdIsNormal(builder->initial_xmin_horizon) &&
@@ -1399,7 +1399,7 @@ SnapBuildFindSnapshot(SnapBuild *builder, XLogRecPtr lsn, xl_running_xacts *runn
      * encountered.  In that case, switch to BUILDING_SNAPSHOT state, and
      * record xl_running_xacts->nextXid.  Once all running xacts have finished
      * (i.e. they're all >= nextXid), we have a complete catalog snapshot.  It
-     * might look that we could use xl_running_xact's ->xids information to
+     * might look that we could use xl_running_xacts->xids information to
      * get there quicker, but that is problematic because transactions marked
      * as running, might already have inserted their commit record - it's
      * infeasible to change that with locking.

> On 17 Nov 2022, at 08:06, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I find some typo about xl_running_xacts in comments.
> Attached a patch to fix those.

Thanks, applied!

> -     * might look that we could use xl_running_xact's ->xids information to
> +     * might look that we could use xl_running_xacts->xids information to

I'm not a native english speaker, but since xl_running_xacts refers to a name
in this case and not an indication of plural possession, ending with a 's is
correct even if it ends with an 's', so I instead changed this to
"xl_running_xacts's".

--
Daniel Gustafsson        https://vmware.com/

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 16:22, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
>> On 17 Nov 2022, at 08:06, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I find some typo about xl_running_xacts in comments.
>> Attached a patch to fix those.
>
> Thanks, applied!
>
>> -     * might look that we could use xl_running_xact's ->xids information to
>> +     * might look that we could use xl_running_xacts->xids information to
>
> I'm not a native english speaker, but since xl_running_xacts refers to a name
> in this case and not an indication of plural possession, ending with a 's is
> correct even if it ends with an 's', so I instead changed this to
> "xl_running_xacts's".

Thanks,  I found other places use "xl_running_xacs'",
such as "xl_running_xacts' oldestRunningXid" in snapbuild.c.

-- 
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.