Re: Assertion failure in HEAD and 13 after calling COMMIT in a stored proc
От | Ranier Vilela |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Assertion failure in HEAD and 13 after calling COMMIT in a stored proc |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEudQAr_Ot80kDGTQGS1xdjZre6ruG76ePRdO_NPGeynUrQBBw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Assertion failure in HEAD and 13 after calling COMMIT in a stored proc (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Em qua., 23 de jun. de 2021 às 21:51, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu:
Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 11:01 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> The comment is written in terms of "when can we
>> skip taking a snapshot", while the test in the code is written for
>> the inverse condition "when do we need a snapshot".
> Perhaps that code could have been written as the following, to better
> align with the comments:
> [ invert the variable's meaning ]
Yeah, perhaps. I remember feeling that the code was clearer this
way (because "if (!skip_snapshot)" seems a little backwards).
But it might be better to make the code fit the comment than to
try to invert the description in the comment.
I'm not a native speaker, so I would be of little help with clearer and more elusive comments.
If you both agree that the current code is correct, please correct the comments.
The current code is much simpler and readable.
The current code is much simpler and readable.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: