On 20-10-2015 08:28, Bernd Helmle wrote:
The 2nd assignment to slot_name looks unnecessary?
Yes, it is. Seems to be an oversight. Patch attached. -- Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
>From 87570993d29f2c98121c3a0a75c85cdc4211f24f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Euler Taveira <eu...@timbira.com.br> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:52:26 -0300 Subject: [PATCH] Fix a duplicated assignment in walsender code It seems that the 2nd assignment was an oversight. Spotted by Bernd Helmle. --- src/backend/replication/walsender.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c index c6043cd..ca1b4b9 100644 --- a/src/backend/replication/walsender.c +++ b/src/backend/replication/walsender.c @@ -834,7 +834,6 @@ CreateReplicationSlot(CreateReplicationSlotCmd *cmd) ReplicationSlotSave(); } - slot_name = NameStr(MyReplicationSlot->data.name); snprintf(xpos, sizeof(xpos), "%X/%X", (uint32) (MyReplicationSlot->data.confirmed_flush >> 32), (uint32) MyReplicationSlot->data.confirmed_flush); -- 2.1.4
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
