| From: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Soumya S Murali <soumyamurali(dot)work(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com" <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, "byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com" <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, "andres(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Checkpointer write combining |
| Date: | 2025-12-15 21:50:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAAKRu_bbo9Yk8Le2pR+tVfUDXzm3=ZaDphuAseLc7P_=s3EP0w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 2:14 AM Soumya S Murali
<soumyamurali(dot)work(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Here I made some changes in the logic of the function that only returns a real LSN when the buffer actually needs a WAL flush. If the buffer is not permanent or doesn’t need WAL, it returns false and set the LSN to InvalidXLogRecPtr, by which it can avoid confusions or unsafe downstream behaviors.
Thanks for the suggestions. It would be best if you attached a patch
instead of pasting it in the email like this with no formatting (and
no diff). It is very hard to tell what you've changed.
- Melanie
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Wolfgang Walther | 2025-12-15 21:59:37 | Re: PRI?64 vs Visual Studio (2022) |
| Previous Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2025-12-15 21:50:04 | Re: Periodic authorization expiration checks using GoAway message |