Moin, On Tue, December 26, 2017 5:26 am, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Tels <nospam-pg-ab...@bloodgate.com> > wrote: >> Moin, >> >> On Mon, December 25, 2017 7:26 pm, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek >>> <petr.jeli...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>>> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>>>> >>>>> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong >>>>> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so that we can >>>>> check the read LSN and set WalSndCaughtUp = true even after read a >>>>> record without wait. Attached updated patch passed 'make >>>>> check-world'. >>>>> Please review it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> This version looks good to me and seems to be in line with what we do >>>> in >>>> physical replication. >>>> >>>> Marking as ready for committer. >> >> (Sorry Masahiko, you'll get this twice, as fumbled the reply button.) >> >> I have not verifed that comment and/or code are correct, just a grammar >> fix: >> >> + /* >> + * If we've sent a record is at or beyond the flushed >> point, then >> + * we're caught up. >> >> That should read more like this: >> >> "If we've sent a record that is at or beyond the flushed point, we have >> caught up." >> > > Thank you for reviewing the patch! > Actually, that comment is inspired by the comment just below comment. > ISTM it's better to fix both if grammar of them is not appropriate.
Oh yes. Your attached version reads fine to me. All the best, Tels
