Re: Confusing comment in xlog.c or am I missing something?

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Confusing comment in xlog.c or am I missing something?
Date: 2013-05-02 06:27:00
Message-ID: 51820734.4030808@vmware.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02.05.2013 09:11, Amit Langote wrote:
> In that case, should the comment be "/* Check for crossing of xlog
> file boundary */"
> instead of /* Check for crossing of xlog segment boundary */, since
> ( RecPtr->xrecoff>= XLogFileSize )
> would mean crossing the xlog "file" (not segment) boundary, right?

Yeah, that would be more correct. The phrase we seem to use elsewhere in
xlog.c is "crossing a logid boundary".

- Heikki

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2013-05-02 06:34:15 Re: Confusing long option in pg_receivexlog/basebackup/dumpall
Previous Message Amit Langote 2013-05-02 06:11:14 Re: Confusing comment in xlog.c or am I missing something?