On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 7:37 AM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 15, 2026, at 17:51, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Ashutosh,
>
> Thanks for your review again.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 5:30 AM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 2:56 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 5:41 PM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> ---
> In origin.h:
>
> +/*
> + * Clear the per-transaction replication origin state.
> + *
> + * replorigin_session_origin is also cleared if clear_origin is set.
> + */
> +static inline void
> +replorigin_xact_clear(bool clear_origin)
> +{
> + replorigin_xact_state.origin_lsn = InvalidXLogRecPtr;
> + replorigin_xact_state.origin_timestamp = 0;
> + if (clear_origin)
> + replorigin_xact_state.origin = InvalidRepOriginId;
> +}
>
> Why does this function need to move to origin.h from origin.c?
>
>
> That’s because, per Ashutosh’s suggestion, I added two static inline helpers replorigin_xact_set_origin() and
replorigin_xact_set_lsn_timestamp(),and I thought replorigin_xact_clear() should stay close with them.
>
> But looks like they don’t have to be inline as they are not on hot paths. So I moved them all to origin.c and only
externthem.
>
>
> I am fine with it being non-static-inline.
>
> +/*
> + * Clear the per-transaction replication origin state.
> + *
> + * replorigin_session_origin is also cleared if clear_origin is set.
> + */
> +void
> +replorigin_xact_clear(bool clear_origin)
>
> Nitpick. This file exposes a few functions. The function with name
> replogrigin_* deal with replication origin itself. The functions with
> name replorigin_session_* deal with the session state of replication
> origin. It feels like the new function is dealing with per-transaction
> state within a given session. Does it make sense to name it
> replorigin_session_xact_clear() instead of replorigin_xact_clear()?
> Just a thought.
>
>
> We’ve already gone back and forth on this function for several rounds, so I’d prefer not to make further changes
here.
>
Ok. Let's leave this to committer's judgement.
>
> Hopefully, v11 is ready to go.
I don't have any further comments.
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
