On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 02:31:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On 2012-12-01 12:14:37 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> It could do with some comments ;-) > > > Hehe, yes. Hopefully this version has enough of that. > > Hm, maybe too many --- I don't really think it's necessary for utility.c > to provide a redundant explanation of what's happening. > > Committed with adjustments --- mainly, the > TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId test was flat out wrong, because it > would accept a parent transaction ID as well as a subcommitted > subtransaction ID. We could safely allow the latter, but I don't think > it's worth the trouble to add another xact.c test function.
Thanks everyone. I can confirm that pg_upgrades make "check now" passes, so this should green the buildfarm. Again, I aplogize for the fire drill. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
