Em dom., 26 de jan. de 2020 às 23:48, Mark Dilger <
mark.dil...@enterprisedb.com> escreveu:
> > On Jan 24, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >
> > 3. At function KeepLogSeg (line 9357) the test if (slotSegNo <= 0), the
> var slotSegNo is uint64 and not can be < 0.
>
> There is something
At Mon, 27 Jan 2020 16:55:56 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 06:47:57PM -0800, Mark Dilger wrote:
> > There is something unusual about comparing a XLogSegNo variable in
> > this way, but it seems to go back to 2014 when the replication slots
> > were introduced in commi
On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 06:47:57PM -0800, Mark Dilger wrote:
> There is something unusual about comparing a XLogSegNo variable in
> this way, but it seems to go back to 2014 when the replication slots
> were introduced in commit 858ec11858a914d4c380971985709b6d6b7dd6fc,
> and XLogSegNo was unsigned
> On Jan 24, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
> 3. At function KeepLogSeg (line 9357) the test if (slotSegNo <= 0), the var
> slotSegNo is uint64 and not can be < 0.
There is something unusual about comparing a XLogSegNo variable in this way,
but it seems to go back to 2014 when t
Hi,
There are 3 tiny improvements to xlog.c code:
1. At function StartupXLOG (line 6370), the second test if
(ArchiveRecoveryRequested) is redundant and can secure removed.
2. At function StartupXLOG (line 7254) the var switchedTLI already been
tested before and the second test can secure removed.
