Re: trying again to get incremental backup

21.12.2023 23:43, Robert Haas wrote:
>> There are also two deadcode.DeadStores complaints from clang. First one is
>> about:
>>           /*
>>            * Align the wait time to prevent drift. This doesn't really matter,
>>            * but we'd like the warnings about how long we've been waiting to say
>>            * 10 seconds, 20 seconds, 30 seconds, 40 seconds ... without ever
>>            * drifting to something that is not a multiple of ten.
>>            */
>>           timeout_in_ms -=
>>               TimestampDifferenceMilliseconds(current_time, initial_time) %
>>               timeout_in_ms;
>> It looks like this timeout is really not used.
> Oops. It should be. See attached.

My quick experiment shows that that TimestampDifferenceMilliseconds call
always returns zero, due to it's arguments swapped.

The other changes look good to me.

Thank you!

Best regards,
Alexander