On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 3:33 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
> Indeed, for gistxlogDelete, that's the other way around (as
> compare to what the commit message says).
Woops. Good point.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Hi,
On 3/3/23 6:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 11:28 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
Thanks for having looked at it!
+1. Committed.
Thanks!
Not a big deal, but the commit message that has been used is not 100% accurate.
Indeed, for gistxlogDelete, that's the other way
On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 11:28 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
> Thanks for having looked at it!
+1. Committed.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Hi,
On 3/3/23 12:30 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 6:35 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
On 1/6/23 11:05 AM, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
Hi hackers,
Please find attached a patch to $SUBJECT.
The wrong comments have been discovered by Robert in [1].
Submitting this here as a
On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 6:35 PM Drouvot, Bertrand
wrote:
>
> On 1/6/23 11:05 AM, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> > Hi hackers,
> >
> > Please find attached a patch to $SUBJECT.
> >
> > The wrong comments have been discovered by Robert in [1].
> >
> > Submitting this here as a separate thread so it does
: [PATCH v2] Fix comments in gistxlogDelete, xl_heap_freeze_page and
xl_btree_delete
gistxlogDelete claims that OffsetNumbers are in payload of blk 0, which is not
as they follow the main payload.
xl_heap_freeze_page claims that freeze plans and offset numbers follow, but
they don't: they're
Hi hackers,
Please find attached a patch to $SUBJECT.
The wrong comments have been discovered by Robert in [1].
Submitting this here as a separate thread so it does not get lost in the
logical decoding
on standby thread.
[1]:
