Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue

From: Shawn Debnath <sdn(at)amazon(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue
Date: 2019-03-05 17:15:57
Message-ID: 20190305171557.GA30015@f01898859afd.ant.amazon.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 11:53:16AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > +#include "fmgr.h"
> > +#include "storage/block.h"
> > +#include "storage/relfilenode.h"
> > +#include "storage/smgr.h"
> > +#include "storage/sync.h"
>
> > Why do we need to include fmgr.h in md.h?
>
> More generally, any massive increase in an include file's inclusions
> is probably a sign that you need to refactor. Cross-header inclusions
> are best avoided altogether if you can --- obviously that's not always
> possible, but we should minimize them. We've had some very unfortunate
> problems in the past from indiscriminate #includes in headers.

Agree - I do pay attention to these, but this one slipped through the
cracks (copied smgr.h then edited to remove smgr bits). Thanks for
catching this, will fix in the next patch iteration.

--
Shawn Debnath
Amazon Web Services (AWS)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2019-03-05 17:22:12 Re: Re: Optimze usage of immutable functions as relation
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-03-05 17:07:58 Re: Rare SSL failures on eelpout