On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> I've added code following Michael and Tom's comments to the previous
>> patch. New patch attached.
> Couple of minor suggestions:
> * Rather than deleting the comment for SubTransSetParent entirely,
> maybe make it say "It's possible that the parent was already recorded.
> However, we should never be asked to change an already-set entry to
> something else."
> * In SubTransGetTopmostTransaction, maybe it'd be better to spell
> "TransactionIdFollowsOrEquals" as "!TransactionIdPrecedes" to make
> it look more like the test just above.  Matter of taste though.
> * Less a matter of taste is that I think that should be just elog(ERROR);
> there's no good reason to make it FATAL.
> * Also, I think there should be a comment there, along the lines of
> "check for reversed linkage to ensure this isn't an infinite loop".

No more comments from here, thanks for working on the patch.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to