On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Simon Riggs
> wrote:
>
>> I find it confusing that the "Lowest" pointer value is also "Invalid".
>> Valid != Invalid
>>
> In complement to that, note that I mentioned Invalid should be UINT_MAX
> for clari
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I find it confusing that the "Lowest" pointer value is also "Invalid".
> Valid != Invalid
>
In complement to that, note that I mentioned Invalid should be UINT_MAX for
clarity.
--
Michael
On 12 September 2014 13:16, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
>> I haven't looked at those places closely, but it seems possible that at
>> least some of those variables are supposed to be initialized to a value
>> smaller than any valid WAL pos
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 09:16:42PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Patch attached in case.
> I like this. Can we apply it Heikki?
I actually registered it to the next CF so as it does not fall into
oblivion, simply forgot to mention it:
htt
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 09:16:42PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> wrote:
> > I haven't looked at those places closely, but it seems possible that at
> > least some of those variables are supposed to be initialized to a value
> > smaller than a
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
> I haven't looked at those places closely, but it seems possible that at
> least some of those variables are supposed to be initialized to a value
> smaller than any valid WAL position, rather than just Invalid. In other
> words, if we de
On 09/12/2014 03:17 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
In walsender.c, sentPtr is initialized as follows:
static XLogRecPtr sentPtr = 0;
Isn't that incorrect and shouldn't we use InvalidXLogRecPtr instead?
Actually by looking more around I found
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> In walsender.c, sentPtr is initialized as follows:
> static XLogRecPtr sentPtr = 0;
> Isn't that incorrect and shouldn't we use InvalidXLogRecPtr instead?
Actually by looking more around I found a couple of extra places where
the same incon
Hi all,
In walsender.c, sentPtr is initialized as follows:
static XLogRecPtr sentPtr = 0;
Isn't that incorrect and shouldn't we use InvalidXLogRecPtr instead?
Patch is attached.
Regards,
--
Michael
diff --git a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c
index 844a5d
