@@ -1089,25 +1089,25 @@ SummarizeDbaseRecord(XLogReaderState *xlogreader, BlockRefTable *brtab)
10891089 uint8 info = XLogRecGetInfo (xlogreader ) & ~XLR_INFO_MASK ;
10901090
10911091 /*
1092- * We use relfilenode zero for a given database OID and tablespace OID
1093- * to indicate that all relations with that pair of IDs have been
1094- * recreated if they exist at all. Effectively, we're setting a limit
1095- * block of 0 for all such relfilenodes.
1092+ * We use relfilenode zero for a given database OID and tablespace OID to
1093+ * indicate that all relations with that pair of IDs have been recreated
1094+ * if they exist at all. Effectively, we're setting a limit block of 0 for
1095+ * all such relfilenodes.
10961096 *
10971097 * Technically, this special handling is only needed in the case of
1098- * XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_FILE_COPY, because that can create a whole bunch
1099- * of relation files in a directory without logging anything
1100- * specific to each one. If we didn't mark the whole DB OID/TS OID
1101- * combination in some way, then a tablespace that was dropped after
1102- * the reference backup and recreated using the FILE_COPY method prior
1103- * to the incremental backup would look just like one that was never
1104- * touched at all, which would be catastrophic.
1098+ * XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_FILE_COPY, because that can create a whole bunch of
1099+ * relation files in a directory without logging anything specific to each
1100+ * one. If we didn't mark the whole DB OID/TS OID combination in some way,
1101+ * then a tablespace that was dropped after the reference backup and
1102+ * recreated using the FILE_COPY method prior to the incremental backup
1103+ * would look just like one that was never touched at all, which would be
1104+ * catastrophic.
11051105 *
1106- * But it seems best to adopt this treatment for all records that drop
1107- * or create a DB OID/TS OID combination. That's similar to how we
1108- * treat the limit block for individual relations, and it's an extra
1109- * layer of safety here. We can never lose data by marking more stuff
1110- * as needing to be backed up in full.
1106+ * But it seems best to adopt this treatment for all records that drop or
1107+ * create a DB OID/TS OID combination. That's similar to how we treat the
1108+ * limit block for individual relations, and it's an extra layer of safety
1109+ * here. We can never lose data by marking more stuff as needing to be
1110+ * backed up in full.
11111111 */
11121112 if (info == XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_FILE_COPY )
11131113 {
@@ -1136,7 +1136,7 @@ SummarizeDbaseRecord(XLogReaderState *xlogreader, BlockRefTable *brtab)
11361136 {
11371137 xl_dbase_drop_rec * xlrec ;
11381138 RelFileLocator rlocator ;
1139- int i ;
1139+ int i ;
11401140
11411141 xlrec = (xl_dbase_drop_rec * ) XLogRecGetData (xlogreader );
11421142 rlocator .dbOid = xlrec -> db_id ;
0 commit comments