Re: Remove a redundant condition check
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Remove a redundant condition check |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1K3SFVroDr-vsy60coQ9v0+34MA0rxsn6G2j_EJvpf30A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Remove a redundant condition check (Ádám Balogh <adam.balogh@ericsson.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Remove a redundant condition check
Re: Remove a redundant condition check RE: Remove a redundant condition check |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:23 PM Ádám Balogh <adam.balogh@ericsson.com> wrote: > > > A one line change to remove a duplicate check. This duplicate check was detected during testing my contribution to a staticcode analysis tool. There is no functional change, no new tests needed. > > Yeah, this duplicate check is added as part of commit b2a5545bd6. See below part of change. - /* - * If this record was a timeline switch, wake up any - * walsenders to notice that we are on a new timeline. - */ - if (switchedTLI && AllowCascadeReplication()) - WalSndWakeup(); + /* Is this a timeline switch? */ + if (switchedTLI) + { + /* + * Before we continue on the new timeline, clean up any + * (possibly bogus) future WAL segments on the old timeline. + */ + RemoveNonParentXlogFiles(EndRecPtr, ThisTimeLineID); + + /* + * Wake up any walsenders to notice that we are on a new + * timeline. + */ + if (switchedTLI && AllowCascadeReplication()) + WalSndWakeup(); + } It seems we forgot to remove the additional check for switchedTLI while adding a new check. I think we can remove this duplicate check in the HEAD code. I am not sure if it is worth to backpatch such a change. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: