Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

From: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date: 2022-03-11 14:02:41
Message-ID: CAE9k0PmfEY+w8=EK99ysXmCzHBJ7L=5Ms+vWiMFMFFpiy4h+Kw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

You may also need to add documentation to app-createdb.sgml. Currently
you have just added to create_database.sgml. Also, I had a quick look
at the new changes done in v13-0005-WAL-logged-CREATE-DATABASE.patch
and they seemed fine to me although I haven't put much emphasis on the
comments and other cosmetic stuff.

--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 3:51 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 11:52 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:18 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 6:02 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > > I have completely changed the logic for this refactoring. Basically,
> > > > write_relmap_file(), is already having parameters to control whether
> > > > to write wal, send inval and we are already passing the dbpath.
> > > > Instead of making a new function I just pass one additional parameter
> > > > to this function itself about whether we are creating a new map or not
> > > > and I think with that changes are very less and this looks cleaner to
> > > > me. Similarly for load_relmap_file() also I just had to pass the
> > > > dbpath and memory for destination map. Please have a look and let me
> > > > know your thoughts.
> > >
> > > It's not terrible, but how about something like the attached instead?
> > > I think this has the effect of reducing the number of cases that the
> > > low-level code needs to know about from 2 to 1, instead of making it
> > > go up from 2 to 3.
> >
> > Yeah this looks cleaner, I will rebase the remaining patch.
>
> Here is the updated version of the patch set.
>
> Changes, 1) it take Robert's patch as first refactoring patch 2)
> Rebase other new relmapper apis on top of that in 0002 3) Some code
> refactoring in main patch 0005 and also one problem fix, earlier in
> wal log method I have removed ForceSyncCommit(), but IMHO that is
> equally valid whether we use file_copy or wal_log because in both
> cases we are creating the disk files. 4) Support strategy in createdb
> tool and add test case as part of 0006.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Dilip Kumar
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Sharma 2022-03-11 14:23:06 Re: pg_walinspect - a new extension to get raw WAL data and WAL stats
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-03-11 13:55:16 Re: role self-revocation