Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby
От | shveta malik |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJpy0uAzqb4C22WkWJRQS3LpSd57P3h6KwBhed2UacQx+bFbSw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 2:07 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2023-Sep-27, Peter Smith wrote: > > > 3. get_local_synced_slot_names > > > > + for (int i = 0; i < max_replication_slots; i++) > > + { > > + ReplicationSlot *s = &ReplicationSlotCtl->replication_slots[i]; > > + > > + /* Check if it is logical synchronized slot */ > > + if (s->in_use && SlotIsLogical(s) && s->data.synced) > > + { > > + for (int j = 0; j < MySlotSyncWorker->dbcount; j++) > > + { > > > > Loop variables are not declared in the common PG code way. > > Note that since we added C99 as a mandatory requirement for compilers in > commit d9dd406fe281, we've been using declarations in loop initializers > (see 143290efd079). We have almost 500 occurrences of this already. > Older code, obviously, does not use them, but that's no reason not to > introduce them in new code. I think they make the code a bit leaner, so > I suggest to use these liberally. > Okay, we will. Thanks for letting us know. thanks Shveta
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: