From 7f4f3755b2b41fbefa7b4db3e8cf099aa45d3013 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?=C3=81lvaro=20Herrera?= Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2026 12:42:20 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v6 3/3] pgindent --- src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c | 22 +++++++++---------- .../replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c | 8 +++---- 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c b/src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c index c45edae853a..357bf697a90 100644 --- a/src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c +++ b/src/backend/replication/logical/decode.c @@ -896,18 +896,18 @@ DecodeAbort(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx, XLogRecordBuffer *buf, * Remove tuplecid changes queued by the aborted (sub)transactions * from the toplevel's list, before the transactions are torn down. * The abort record's primary xid tells the cleanup function whether - * the whole toplevel is going away, in which case scanning the list is - * pointless. + * the whole toplevel is going away, in which case scanning the list + * is pointless. * - * Note that we must not try to decide that from the primary xid's - * own association instead: an abort record is written once the - * subtransaction is already in TRANS_ABORT, so it never carries - * the toplevel xid in its header (IsSubxactTopXidLogPending() - * requires IsTransactionState()), and an outer subtransaction - * that never wrote WAL of its own -- e.g. a savepoint that only - * wraps other savepoints -- can therefore have no association at - * all, while the released inner subtransactions it rolls back do - * have one and their tuplecids still need to be removed. + * Note that we must not try to decide that from the primary xid's own + * association instead: an abort record is written once the + * subtransaction is already in TRANS_ABORT, so it never carries the + * toplevel xid in its header (IsSubxactTopXidLogPending() requires + * IsTransactionState()), and an outer subtransaction that never wrote + * WAL of its own -- e.g. a savepoint that only wraps other savepoints + * -- can therefore have no association at all, while the released + * inner subtransactions it rolls back do have one and their tuplecids + * still need to be removed. */ ReorderBufferCleanupAbortedSubTxnTupleCids(ctx->reorder, xid, parsed->nsubxacts, diff --git a/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c b/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c index ccbdbde7335..db2a7a9f7fd 100644 --- a/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c +++ b/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c @@ -3218,10 +3218,10 @@ ReorderBufferCleanupAbortedSubTxnTupleCids(ReorderBuffer *rb, /* * If the aborting subtransaction is unknown, try to find the toplevel * transaction through one of its children. There may be any number of - * unknown children, but they cannot have queued tuplecid changes: decoding - * a WAL record that queues such a change first associates its xid with the - * toplevel transaction. Therefore, if all children are unknown, there is - * nothing to remove. + * unknown children, but they cannot have queued tuplecid changes: + * decoding a WAL record that queues such a change first associates its + * xid with the toplevel transaction. Therefore, if all children are + * unknown, there is nothing to remove. */ if (txn == NULL) { -- 2.47.3