| From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, 9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com, andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3? |
| Date: | 2020-03-30 06:08:27 |
| Message-ID: | 20200330060827.GD2324620@rfd.leadboat.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 02:56:11PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Sun, 29 Mar 2020 21:41:01 -0700, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote in
> > Since pendingSyncHash is always NULL under XLogIsNeeded(), I also removed some
> > XLogIsNeeded() tests that immediately preceded !pendingSyncHash tests.
>
> Sounds reasonable. In AddPendingSync, don't we put
> Assert(!XLogIsNeeded()) instead of "Assert(pendingSyncHash == NULL)"?
> The former guarantees the relationship between XLogIsNeeded() and
> pendingSyncHash, and the existing latter assertion looks redundant as
> it is placed just after "if (pendingSyncHash)".
The "Assert(pendingSyncHash == NULL)" is indeed useless; I will remove it. I
am not inclined to replace it with Assert(!XLogIsNeeded()). This static
function is not likely to get more callers, so the chance of accidentally
calling it under XLogIsNeeded() is too low.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-03-30 06:17:57 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2020-03-30 05:58:54 | Re: backup manifests |