Re: Making pg_rewind faster

From: Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: John H <johnhyvr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, wenhui qiu <qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Kwan <justinpkwan(at)outlook(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, vignesh ravichandran <admin(at)viggy28(dot)dev>, "hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi" <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: Making pg_rewind faster
Date: 2025-10-25 01:50:52
Message-ID: CAFC+b6pfeK2LvUpSY-YtHfcHRsiW34XzA6YLYGMj6v6p6f7NZA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Oct 25, 2025 at 6:46 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 24, 2025 at 05:51:54PM +0530, Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla wrote:
> > - * These files exist on the source and the target services, so
> they
> > should
> > + * These files exist on the source and the target servers, so
> they
> > should
>
> Not sure what my fingers were doing here.
>
> > I think as we are not using mtime to show that the file has not been
> copied
> > and been skipped ,instead we are doing the same with the debug message
> > (qr/pg_wal\/$wal_seg_skipped \(NONE\)/,), so stat calculation of this WAL
> > segment can be removed.
>
> Yes, removing this one makes sense.
>
> And, to keep it short: applied.
>

Thanks Michael.

--
Thanks,
Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2025-10-25 03:21:28 Re: C11: should we use char32_t for unicode code points?
Previous Message David Rowley 2025-10-25 01:39:39 Have the planner convert COUNT(1) / COUNT(not_null_col) to COUNT(*)