Horton
Menu

Thread

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() consistently for WAL position checks

  2. Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() in various places

  1. Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2026-04-10T06:11:35Z

    Hi,

This small cleanup patch updates src/bin/pg_waldump/archive_waldump.c
to use the recently introduced XLogRecPtrIsValid() helper instead of
negating XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(). The current code uses double-negative
checks such as:
Assert(!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->startptr));
if (!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->endptr))

This patch changes them to:
Assert(XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->startptr));
if (XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->endptr))

This improves readability without changing behavior. The attached
patch has the changes for the same.

Regards,
Vignesh

  2. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> — 2026-04-10T14:46:39Z

    On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 3:11 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This small cleanup patch updates src/bin/pg_waldump/archive_waldump.c
> to use the recently introduced XLogRecPtrIsValid() helper instead of
> negating XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(). The current code uses double-negative
> checks such as:
> Assert(!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->startptr));
> if (!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->endptr))
>
> This patch changes them to:
> Assert(XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->startptr));
> if (XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->endptr))
>
> This improves readability without changing behavior. The attached
> patch has the changes for the same.

Commit a2b02293bc6 switched various places to use XLogRecPtrIsValid(),
but it looks like later commits accidentally introduced uses of
XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() again. So +1 for this change.

Also, that commit replaced direct comparisons with InvalidXLogRecPtr with
XLogRecPtrIsValid(). I noticed two such comparisons [1]. Should these be
updated as well?

Regards,

[1]
$ git grep -E "[=\!]= InvalidXLogRecPtr"
src/backend/commands/repack_worker.c:   Assert(ctx->reader->EndRecPtr
!= InvalidXLogRecPtr);
src/backend/replication/walreceiver.c:  applyPtr = (latestApplyPtr ==
InvalidXLogRecPtr) ?

-- 
Fujii Masao

  3. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2026-04-13T07:10:06Z

    On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 at 20:16, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 3:11 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This small cleanup patch updates src/bin/pg_waldump/archive_waldump.c
> > to use the recently introduced XLogRecPtrIsValid() helper instead of
> > negating XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(). The current code uses double-negative
> > checks such as:
> > Assert(!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->startptr));
> > if (!XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(privateInfo->endptr))
> >
> > This patch changes them to:
> > Assert(XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->startptr));
> > if (XLogRecPtrIsValid(privateInfo->endptr))
> >
> > This improves readability without changing behavior. The attached
> > patch has the changes for the same.
>
> Commit a2b02293bc6 switched various places to use XLogRecPtrIsValid(),
> but it looks like later commits accidentally introduced uses of
> XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() again. So +1 for this change.
>
> Also, that commit replaced direct comparisons with InvalidXLogRecPtr with
> XLogRecPtrIsValid(). I noticed two such comparisons [1]. Should these be
> updated as well?

I felt these also should be updated, the attached v2 version patch
includes the changes for the same.

Regards,
Vignesh

  4. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> — 2026-04-16T04:11:52Z

    On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 4:10 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> I felt these also should be updated, the attached v2 version patch
> includes the changes for the same.

Thanks for updating the patch!

-       applyPtr = (latestApplyPtr == InvalidXLogRecPtr) ?
+       applyPtr = (XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(latestApplyPtr)) ?

XLogRecPtrIsValid() should be used here, instead?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao

  5. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    Xiaopeng Wang <wxp_728@163.com> — 2026-04-16T05:27:13Z

    在 2026/4/16 12:11, Fujii Masao 写道:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 4:10 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I felt these also should be updated, the attached v2 version patch
>> includes the changes for the same.
> Thanks for updating the patch!
>
> -       applyPtr = (latestApplyPtr == InvalidXLogRecPtr) ?
> +       applyPtr = (XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(latestApplyPtr)) ?
>
> XLogRecPtrIsValid() should be used here, instead?
>
> Regards,
>

Yeah, I was about to raise the same comment, and Fujii-san beat me. I believe it should be XLogRecPtrIsValid().

Otherwise, the patch looks good to me.

Regards,
Xiaopeng Wang

  6. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2026-04-16T10:55:31Z

    On Thu, 16 Apr 2026 at 09:42, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 4:10 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I felt these also should be updated, the attached v2 version patch
> > includes the changes for the same.
>
> Thanks for updating the patch!
>
> -       applyPtr = (latestApplyPtr == InvalidXLogRecPtr) ?
> +       applyPtr = (XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(latestApplyPtr)) ?
>
> XLogRecPtrIsValid() should be used here, instead?

Yes, that seems better, the attached v3 version patch has the changes
for the same.

Regards,
Vignesh

  7. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com> — 2026-04-16T12:30:38Z

    On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 4:25 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2026 at 09:42, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 4:10 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I felt these also should be updated, the attached v2 version patch
> > > includes the changes for the same.
> >
> > Thanks for updating the patch!
> >
> > -       applyPtr = (latestApplyPtr == InvalidXLogRecPtr) ?
> > +       applyPtr = (XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(latestApplyPtr)) ?
> >
> > XLogRecPtrIsValid() should be used here, instead?

The outer parentheses do not seem to be needed, as
XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() already includes them.

Other than that, the v3 patch looks good to me.

Regards,
Amul

  8. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> — 2026-04-16T14:06:25Z

    On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 9:31 PM Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
> The outer parentheses do not seem to be needed, as
> XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() already includes them.
>
> Other than that, the v3 patch looks good to me.

I've updated the patch based on Amul's suggestion and pushed it. Thanks!

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao

  9. Re: Use XLogRecPtrIsValid() instead of negated XLogRecPtrIsInvalid

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2026-04-16T14:12:07Z

    On Thu, 16 Apr 2026 at 19:36, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 9:31 PM Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The outer parentheses do not seem to be needed, as
> > XLogRecPtrIsInvalid() already includes them.
> >
> > Other than that, the v3 patch looks good to me.
>
> I've updated the patch based on Amul's suggestion and pushed it. Thanks!

Thanks for pushing the patch.

Regards,
Vignesh