| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Prabhat Sahu <prabhat(dot)sahu(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY |
| Date: | 2021-10-25 14:45:21 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZrtgZCTA++wOS+=nXGPhrp6965EZorpRfyvyEpFfdWiQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Ok, did the same in the attached 0001 patch.
>
> There is no harm in calling LocalSetXLogInsertAllowed() calling
> multiple times, but the problem I can see is that with this patch user
> is allowed to call LocalSetXLogInsertAllowed() at the time it is
> supposed not to be called e.g. when LocalXLogInsertAllowed = 0;
> WAL writes are explicitly disabled.
I've pushed 0001 and 0002 but I reversed the order of them and made a
few other edits.
I don't really see the issue you mention here as a problem. There's
only one place where we set LocalXLogInsertAllowed = 0, and I don't
know that we'll ever have another one.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-10-25 15:00:42 | Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-10-25 14:40:29 | Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions |