On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 09:53:38AM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote: > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 12:31:16PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 9, 2022 at 12:18 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: >>> Okay, I'd rather apply the same rule everywhere for consistency, then, >>> like in the attached. That's minimal, still. >> >> That's fine with me. In the interest of full disclosure, I did kind of >> notice this when reviewing the patch, though perhaps not every >> instance, and just decided that it didn't seem important enough to >> worry about. I'm totally OK with you thinking otherwise, though, >> especially since you also volunteered to do the work thus generated. >> :-)
I guessed so :p > This is fine with me as well. I only left these out because the extra > variable felt unnecessary to me for these functions. Okay, done, then. > While you are at it, would you mind fixing the misspelling of > OldestVisibleMXactId in multixact.c (as per the attached)? Indeed. Fixed as well. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
