@@ -1089,25 +1089,25 @@ SummarizeDbaseRecord(XLogReaderState *xlogreader, BlockRefTable *brtab)
10891089uint8 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 */
11121112if (info == XLOG_DBASE_CREATE_FILE_COPY )
11131113{
@@ -1136,7 +1136,7 @@ SummarizeDbaseRecord(XLogReaderState *xlogreader, BlockRefTable *brtab)
11361136{
11371137xl_dbase_drop_rec * xlrec ;
11381138RelFileLocator rlocator ;
1139- int i ;
1139+ int i ;
11401140
11411141xlrec = (xl_dbase_drop_rec * )XLogRecGetData (xlogreader );
11421142rlocator .dbOid = xlrec -> db_id ;