Misleading comment in slru.h

Started by Thomas Munroabout 9 years ago2 messageshackers
Beta feature

Hackorum builds and tests every patch posted to the lists, not only commitfest submissions. This is Hackorum's own CI rather than the PostgreSQL project's, and it is still under testing - please report anything that looks wrong.

won't retrysuccessCI history

You can run a PostgreSQL built from this patch straight from Docker, with no checkout and no build:

docker run --rm -p 5432:5432 ghcr.io/hackorum-dev/postgres-patch:t37016
psql -h localhost -U postgres

Built from patchset v1 (message #1), July 28, 2026 at 06:04 AM.

Every patchset is also pushed to a branch of our PostgreSQL fork, so you can check out the same tree CI built. Without a PostgreSQL checkout:

git clone --branch t37016_1 https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.git

In a checkout you already have, add the fork once:

git remote add hackorum https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.git

then, for this patchset and every later one:

git fetch hackorum t37016_1 && git checkout t37016_1

Patchset v1 (message #1) is on t37016_1

Jump to latest
#1Thomas Munro
thomas.munro@gmail.com

Hi hackers,

As mentioned in another thread[1]/messages/by-id/CAEepm=1UdqnmHTikNBsBYsSDuk3nc9rXFPbeWYrbA2iM6K9q2w@mail.gmail.com, slru.h says:

* Note: slru.c currently assumes that segment file names will be four hex
* digits. This sets a lower bound on the segment size (64K transactions
* for 32-bit TransactionIds).

That comment is out of date: commit 638cf09e extended SLRUs to support
5 character names to support pg_multixact and commit 73c986ad extended
support to 6 character SLRU file names for pg_commit_ts.

Should we just remove that comment?

[1]: /messages/by-id/CAEepm=1UdqnmHTikNBsBYsSDuk3nc9rXFPbeWYrbA2iM6K9q2w@mail.gmail.com

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachments:

t37016_1
remove-misleading-comment.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=remove-misleading-comment.patchDownload+0-4
#2Peter Eisentraut
peter_e@gmx.net
In reply to: Thomas Munro (#1)
Re: Misleading comment in slru.h

On 6/27/17 01:43, Thomas Munro wrote:

As mentioned in another thread[1], slru.h says:

* Note: slru.c currently assumes that segment file names will be four hex
* digits. This sets a lower bound on the segment size (64K transactions
* for 32-bit TransactionIds).

That comment is out of date: commit 638cf09e extended SLRUs to support
5 character names to support pg_multixact and commit 73c986ad extended
support to 6 character SLRU file names for pg_commit_ts.

Should we just remove that comment?

done

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers