From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() vs GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid() |
Date: | 2021-02-14 22:07:37 |
Message-ID: | CA+hUKGJaasd=qJM2FOv+ZHkuEN+sF1_VPc3hYLxqQzFOHyay-A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:02 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 7:40 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > 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?
>
> Spotted another one: Shouldn't ReadNextFullTransactionId() actually be
> called ReadNewFullTransactionId()? Actually, the inverse approach
> looks like it produces fewer inconsistencies: you could instead rename
> ReadNewTransactionId() to ReadNextTransactionId().
I prefer "next", because that's in the name of the variable it reads,
and the variable name seemed to me to have a more obvious meaning.
That's why I went for that name in commit 2fc7af5e966. I do agree
that it's slightly strange that the 32 and 64 bit versions differ
here. I'd vote for renaming the 32 bit version to match...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-02-14 22:33:07 | Re: GlobalVisIsRemovableFullXid() vs GlobalVisCheckRemovableXid() |
Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-02-14 21:03:38 | Re: [POC] Fast COPY FROM command for the table with foreign partitions |