Fix a comment in WalSnd structure
Hi,
WalSnd structure mutex is being used to protect all the variables of
that structure, not just 'variables shown above' [1]diff --git a/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h b/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h index c14888e493..9c61f92c44 100644 --- a/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h +++ b/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ typedef struct WalSnd */ int sync_standby_priority;. A tiny patch
attached to fix the comment.
Thoughts?
[1]
diff --git a/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h
b/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h
index c14888e493..9c61f92c44 100644
--- a/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h
+++ b/src/include/replication/walsender_private.h
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ typedef struct WalSnd
*/
int sync_standby_priority;- /* Protects shared variables shown above. */
+ /* Protects shared variables in this structure. */
slock_t mutex;--
Bharath Rupireddy
RDS Open Source Databases: https://aws.amazon.com/rds/postgresql/
Attachments:
v1-0001-Fix-a-comment-in-WalSnd-structure.patchapplication/x-patch; name=v1-0001-Fix-a-comment-in-WalSnd-structure.patchDownload+1-2
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 05:40:40PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
WalSnd structure mutex is being used to protect all the variables of
that structure, not just 'variables shown above' [1]. A tiny patch
attached to fix the comment.
Yep, walsender.c tells the same story, aka that replyTime and latch
are updated with the spinlock taken. I'll go update the comment, and
you suggestion sounds fine to me.
--
Michael