From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgbf@twiska.com, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 17:26:30 -0400
Message-ID: <20200711212630.GA6825@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2210888.1594477673@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On 2020-Jul-11, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2020-Jul-09, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I think we should define InvalidXLogSegNo to be ~((uint64)0) and add a
> >> macro to test for that.
>
> > That's overkill really. I just used zero. Running
> > contrib/test_decoding under valgrind, this now passes.
>
> > I think I'd rather do away with the compare to zero, and initialize to
> > something else in GetWALAvailability, though. What we're doing seems
> > unclean and unclear.
>
> Is zero really not a valid segment number?
No, but you cannot retreat from that ...
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, horikyota.ntt@gmail.com, masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view
In-Reply-To: <20200711212630.GA6825@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox