On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 2:45 PM Japin Li <japi...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 15:23, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 12:16 PM Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 11:26 AM Japin Li <japi...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Recently, when I read the XidInMVCCSnapshot(), and find there are some > >>> typos in the comments. > >> > >> > >> Hmm, it seems to me 'the subxact array' is just another saying to refer > >> to snapshot->subxip. I'm not sure about this being typo. But I have no > >> objection to this change, as it is more consistent with the 'xip array' > >> saying followed. > >> > > > > Agreed, it is more about being consistent with xip array. > > Thanks for reviewings. > > Maybe a wrong plural in XidInMvccSnapshot(). > > * Make a quick range check to eliminate most XIDs without looking at the > * xip arrays. > > I think we should use "xip array" instead of "xip arrays". >
I think here the comment is referring to both xip and subxip array, so it looks okay to me. > Furthermore, if the snapshot is taken during recovery, the xip array is > empty, and we should check subxip array. How about changing "xip arrays" > to "xip or subxip array"? > I don't know if that is an improvement. I think we should stick to your initial proposed change. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
