Re: GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() vs GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid()

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() vs GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid()
Date: 2021-02-07 03:40:24
Message-ID: 20210207034024.bghyaav7tzk6gkqo@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2021-02-06 12:27:30 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Why is GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() not named
> GlobalVisCheckRemovableFullXid() instead? ISTM that that name makes
> much more sense, since it is what I'd expect for a function that is
> the "Full XID equivalent" of GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid().
>
> Note also that GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() is the only symbol name
> matching "GlobalVisIsRemovable*".

Looks like a mistake on my part... Probably a rename regex that somehow
went wrong - I went back and forth on those names way too many
times. Want me to push the fix?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-02-07 03:41:39 Re: GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() vs GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid()
Previous Message Peter Smith 2021-02-07 03:38:39 Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker?