Re: Typo about subxip in comments

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 8:56 AM Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Recently, when I read the XidInMVCCSnapshot(), and find there are some
> typos in the comments.
>
> diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c
> index 207c4b27fd..9e8b6756fe 100644
> --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c
> +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c
> @@ -2409,7 +2409,7 @@ GetSnapshotData(Snapshot snapshot)
> * We could try to store xids into xip[] first and then into subxip[]
> * if there are too many xids. That only works if the snapshot doesn't
> * overflow because we do not search subxip[] in that case. A simpler
> - * way is to just store all xids in the subxact array because this is
> + * way is to just store all xids in the subxip array because this is
> * by far the bigger array. We just leave the xip array empty.
> *
> * Either way we need to change the way XidInMVCCSnapshot() works
> diff --git a/src/backend/utils/time/snapmgr.c b/src/backend/utils/time/snapmgr.c
> index f1f2ddac17..2524b1c585 100644
> --- a/src/backend/utils/time/snapmgr.c
> +++ b/src/backend/utils/time/snapmgr.c
> @@ -2345,7 +2345,7 @@ XidInMVCCSnapshot(TransactionId xid, Snapshot snapshot)
> else
> {
> /*
> - * In recovery we store all xids in the subxact array because it is by
> + * In recovery we store all xids in the subxip array because it is by
> * far the bigger array, and we mostly don't know which xids are
> * top-level and which are subxacts. The xip array is empty.
> *
>

LGTM.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.