At Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:09:39 +0900, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote in > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 03:11:54PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 2:20 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > > <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If this is still unacceptable, I propose to change the comment. (I > >> found that the previous patch forgets about do_pg_backup_stop()) > >> > >> - * It fills in backup_state with the information required for the backup, > >> + * It fills in the parameter "state" with the information required for > >> the backup, > > > > +1. There's another place that uses backup_state in the comments. I > > modified that as well. Please see the attached patch. > > Thanks, fixed the comments. I have let the variable names as they are > now in the code, as both are backup-related code paths so it is IMO > clear that the state is linked to a backup.
Thanks! I'm fine with that. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
