Re: Questionable ping logic in LogicalRepApplyLoop

2020-09-04 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera writes: > ... oh look! commit 3f60f690fac1 moved last_recv_timestamp without > realizing that ping_sent had to get the same treatment. Hah, I wondered if something like that had happened, but I didn't get around to excavating in the git history yet. Thanks for doing so. Will pus

Re: Questionable ping logic in LogicalRepApplyLoop

2020-09-04 Thread Alvaro Herrera
On 2020-Sep-04, Tom Lane wrote: > While playing around with clang's scan-build I noticed this warning: > > worker.c:2281:7: warning: Value stored to 'ping_sent' is never read > ping_sent = true; > ^