On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> I've added code following Michael and Tom's comments to the previous >> patch. New patch attached. > > Couple of minor suggestions: > > * Rather than deleting the comment for SubTransSetParent entirely, > maybe make it say "It's possible that the parent was already recorded. > However, we should never be asked to change an already-set entry to > something else." > > * In SubTransGetTopmostTransaction, maybe it'd be better to spell > "TransactionIdFollowsOrEquals" as "!TransactionIdPrecedes" to make > it look more like the test just above. Matter of taste though. > > * Less a matter of taste is that I think that should be just elog(ERROR); > there's no good reason to make it FATAL. > > * Also, I think there should be a comment there, along the lines of > "check for reversed linkage to ensure this isn't an infinite loop".
No more comments from here, thanks for working on the patch. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
