Feedback-ID: ie3de48e3:Fastmail
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 20:12:10 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>,
	"Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Remove stale XXX comment in logical launcher
Message-ID: <apm3dWJyEOjYyeSR@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA4eK1L2NaVOGt7uWFMRqBr+GXP28mDNxhgYrW59xfX+ZfnRQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/apm3dWJyEOjYyeSR%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2026-Sep-03, Amit Kapila wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 11:56 AM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I agree. However, the comments never mention that this is a physical
> > slot, making it easy to misconstrue it as a logical one. Do you think
> > we can add the keyword 'physical' in the comment above this Drop()
> > or/and above CreateConflictDetectionSlot or/and above macro
> > CONFLICT_DETECTION_SLOT?
> 
> Adding such a comment at the time of creation sounds reasonable to me.
> I would still like to check with Alvaro who added this comment in
> commit 2af1dc89282bea681201cf66e2bb32537294e623 whether such a comment
> would make it easier to follow this part of code?

I agree that having a comment stating that the slot we hold is
necessarily physical would be good.  It wouldn't hurt to see exactly
what is being proposed though.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"[PostgreSQL] is a great group; in my opinion it is THE best open source
development communities in existence anywhere."                (Lamar Owen)