Re: use less space in xl_xact_commit patch

On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Leonardo Francalanci <m_lists@yahoo.it> wrote:
>> With regards to the naming, I think it would be better if we  kept
>> XLOG_XACT_COMMIT record exactly as it is now, and make the  second
>> record an entirely new record called XLOG_XACT_COMMIT_FASTPATH.  That
>> way we retain backwards compatibility.
>>
>> If you'd like to rework  like that please, otherwise I can take it from
>> here if you'd  like.
>
>
> I think I did it; while doing it, I think I've found a bug: I didn't update
> "recoveryStopsHere". Please double check that, as I really don't
> know what I'm doing there...
> Should I also change the struct name from xl_xact_commit to
> xl_xact_commit_fast_path?

Yes please.

>> > How can I test it with "weird" stuff as subtransactions,  shared
>> > cache invalidation messages...?
>>
>> make installcheck should  cover those.
>
>
> Ok, all tests passed.

Even better.

Will review, thanks.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services