Re: Non-reserved replication slots and slot advancing

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com
Subject: Re: Non-reserved replication slots and slot advancing
Date: 2018-07-09 06:48:33
Message-ID: 20180709064833.GB30202@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:13:04PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Looking the attached patch, I noticed that both "WAL" and "wal"
> are used in similar ERROR messages. Grepping the source tree
> showed me that it is always in upper case letters except in the
> case it is a part of other words like variable/column/function
> names or "walsender". This is the same with the word "lsn".

Thanks for the lookup.

I see. Indeed, let's fix at the same time the error message close by.
xlog.c uses "WAL location (LSN)" for the same thing, so I am sticking
with that as per the attached. I'll go commit that if there are no
objections. If you see any others which you would like to fix, please
feel free to send a patch.
--
Michael

Attachment Content-Type Size
slot-advance-unreserved-v3.patch text/x-diff 3.6 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-07-09 07:02:00 Re: Possible bug in logical replication.
Previous Message Markus Wanner 2018-07-09 06:19:24 Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents?