Use newly added InvalidCommandId instead of 0

The symbol was added by 71901ab6d; the original code was introduced by
6868ed749.  Development of both overlapped which is why we apparently
failed to notice.

This is a (very slight) behavior change, so I'm not backpatching this to
9.4 for now, even though the symbol does exist there.
This commit is contained in:
Alvaro Herrera 2014-08-25 15:32:30 -04:00
parent 832a12f65e
commit 6f822952ee
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions

View File

@ -2818,7 +2818,7 @@ l1:
if (result == HeapTupleSelfUpdated)
hufd->cmax = HeapTupleHeaderGetCmax(tp.t_data);
else
hufd->cmax = 0; /* for lack of an InvalidCommandId value */
hufd->cmax = InvalidCommandId;
UnlockReleaseBuffer(buffer);
if (have_tuple_lock)
UnlockTupleTuplock(relation, &(tp.t_self), LockTupleExclusive);
@ -3415,7 +3415,7 @@ l2:
if (result == HeapTupleSelfUpdated)
hufd->cmax = HeapTupleHeaderGetCmax(oldtup.t_data);
else
hufd->cmax = 0; /* for lack of an InvalidCommandId value */
hufd->cmax = InvalidCommandId;
UnlockReleaseBuffer(buffer);
if (have_tuple_lock)
UnlockTupleTuplock(relation, &(oldtup.t_self), *lockmode);
@ -4573,7 +4573,7 @@ failed:
if (result == HeapTupleSelfUpdated)
hufd->cmax = HeapTupleHeaderGetCmax(tuple->t_data);
else
hufd->cmax = 0; /* for lack of an InvalidCommandId value */
hufd->cmax = InvalidCommandId;
LockBuffer(*buffer, BUFFER_LOCK_UNLOCK);
if (have_tuple_lock)
UnlockTupleTuplock(relation, tid, mode);