Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
| От | Alvaro Herrera |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 201901251703.r7idekybsep2@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions (Nikhil Sontakke <nikhils@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Eyeballing 0001, it has a few problems.
1. It's under-parenthesizing the txn argument of the macros.
2. the "has"/"is" macro definitions don't return booleans -- see
fce4609d5e5b.
3. the remainder of this no longer makes sense:
/* Do we know this is a subxact? Xid of top-level txn if so */
- bool is_known_as_subxact;
TransactionId toplevel_xid;
I suggest to fix the comment, and also improve the comment next to the
macro that tests this flag.
(4. the macro names are ugly.)
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: