On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> Fix committed/pushed from master to 9.2. 9.1 declares it as a static
>>> function.
>>
>> Er, is that a good idea to back-patch that? Normally routine specs are
>> maintained stable on back-branches, and this is just a cosmetic
>> change.
>
>> Fix committed/pushed from master to 9.2. 9.1 declares it as a static
>> function.
>
> Er, is that a good idea to back-patch that? Normally routine specs are
> maintained stable on back-branches, and this is just a cosmetic
> change.
I'm not sure if it's a cosmetic change or not. I thought decl
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> SyncRepWakeQueue (src/backend/replication/syncrep.c) is not used
>> anywhere except in the file. If there's no good reason for it, I think
>> it should be declared as a static function. Included patch does so.
>
> Fix committed/pushed from
> SyncRepWakeQueue (src/backend/replication/syncrep.c) is not used
> anywhere except in the file. If there's no good reason for it, I think
> it should be declared as a static function. Included patch does so.
Fix committed/pushed from master to 9.2. 9.1 declares it as a static
function.
Best re
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> SyncRepWakeQueue (src/backend/replication/syncrep.c) is not used
> anywhere except in the file. If there's no good reason for it, I think
> it should be declared as a static function. Included patch does so.
That's indeed contradictory with
SyncRepWakeQueue (src/backend/replication/syncrep.c) is not used
anywhere except in the file. If there's no good reason for it, I think
it should be declared as a static function. Included patch does so.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.p
