Re: Fix comment in SnapBuildFindSnapshot

2022-11-28 Thread Masahiko Sawada
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 8:54 AM Michael Paquier  wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 04:46:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Hm, yes, that seems right.  There are three "c) states" in these
> > paragraphs, they are incremental steps.  Will apply if there are no
> > objections.
>
> And done.

Thank you!

Regards,

-- 
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com




Re: Fix comment in SnapBuildFindSnapshot

2022-11-28 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 04:46:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hm, yes, that seems right.  There are three "c) states" in these
> paragraphs, they are incremental steps.  Will apply if there are no
> objections.

And done.
--
Michael


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: Fix comment in SnapBuildFindSnapshot

2022-11-27 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:13:23AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> We have the following comment in SnapBuildFindSnapshot():
> 
> * c) transition from FULL_SNAPSHOT to CONSISTENT.
> *
> * In FULL_SNAPSHOT state (see d) ), and this xl_running_xacts'
> 
> It mentions "(state d) )", which seems like a typo of "(state d)", but
> there is no "state d" in the first place. Reading the discussion of
> the commit 955a684e040 that introduced this comment, this was a
> comment for an old version patch[1]. So I think we can remove this
> part.

Hm, yes, that seems right.  There are three "c) states" in these
paragraphs, they are incremental steps.  Will apply if there are no
objections.
--
Michael


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Fix comment in SnapBuildFindSnapshot

2022-11-27 Thread Masahiko Sawada
Hi,

We have the following comment in SnapBuildFindSnapshot():

* c) transition from FULL_SNAPSHOT to CONSISTENT.
*
* In FULL_SNAPSHOT state (see d) ), and this xl_running_xacts'

It mentions "(state d) )", which seems like a typo of "(state d)", but
there is no "state d" in the first place. Reading the discussion of
the commit 955a684e040 that introduced this comment, this was a
comment for an old version patch[1]. So I think we can remove this
part.

I've attached the patch.

Regards,

[1] 
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170505004237.edtahvrwb3uwd5rs%40alap3.anarazel.de

-- 
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com


fix_comment_in_SnapBuildFindSnapshot.patch
Description: Binary data