Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <fujii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Weird failure with latches in curculio on v15
Date: 2023-02-02 20:09:57
Message-ID: 20230202200957.GA3944544@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 01:24:15PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 09:34:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I was vaguely wondering about removing both of those functions
>> in favor of an integrated function that does a system() call
>> with those things before and after it.
> It seems to me that this is pretty much the same as storing
> in_restore_command in shell_restore.c, and that for recovery modules
> this comes down to the addition of an extra callback called in
> startup.c to check if the flag is up or not. Now the patch is doing
> things the opposite way: like on HEAD, store the flag in startup.c but
> switch it at will with the routines in startup.c. I find the approach
> of the patch a bit more intuitive, TBH, as that makes the interface
> simpler for other recovery modules that may want to switch the flag
> back-and-forth, and I suspect that there may be cases in recovery
> modules where we'd still want to switch the flag, but not necessarily
> link it to system().

Hm. I don't know if we want to encourage further use of
in_restore_command since it seems to be prone to misuse. Here's a v2 that
demonstrateѕ Tom's idea (bikeshedding on names and comments is welcome). I
personally like this approach a bit more.

Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services:

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-stopgap-fix-for-restore_command.patch text/x-diff 4.1 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2023-02-02 20:15:32 Re: Amcheck verification of GiST and GIN
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2023-02-02 19:51:45 Re: Amcheck verification of GiST and GIN