On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:28:47PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 5:12 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi >> <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> If this diagnosis is correct, the comment is proved to be paranoid. > >> It's sometimes difficult to understand what problems really old code >> comments are worrying about. For example, could they have been >> worrying about bugs in the code? Could they have been worrying about >> manual interference with the pg_wal directory? It's hard to know. > > "git blame" can be helpful here, if you trace back to when the comment > was written and then try to find the associated mailing-list discussion. > (That leap can be difficult for commits pre-dating our current > convention of including links in the commit message, but it's usually > not *that* hard to locate contemporaneous discussion.)
I traced this back a while ago. I believe the link() was first added in November 2000 as part of f0e37a8. This even predates WAL recycling, which was added in July 2001 as part of 7d4d5c0. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
