From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Assorted fixes related to WAL files (was: Use XLogFromFileName() in pg_resetwal to parse position from WAL file) |
Date: | 2022-10-04 12:54:18 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACW_GNB7B0DkL=_K-E6HyXQxtQoXejGaAL=JJgv4z-pSCg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 2:01 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > 1. 0001 replaces explicit WAL file parsing code with
>
> Looks good to me.
>
> > 2. 0002 replaces MAXPGPATH with MAXFNAMELEN for WAL file names.
>
> Looks reasonable, too. I don't find other instances of the same mistake.
Thanks for reviewing.
> > 3. 0003 replaces WAL file name calculation with XLogFileNameById() in
> > pg_upgrade/controldata.c to be consistent across the code base. Note
> > that this requires us to change the nextxlogfile size from hard-coded
> > 25 bytes to MAXFNAMELEN (64 bytes).
>
> I'm not sure I like this. In other places where XLogFileNameById() is
> used, the buffer is known to store longer strings so MAXFNAMELEN is
> reasonable. But we don't need to add useless 39 bytes here.
> Therefore, even if I wanted to change it, I would replace it with
> "XLOG_FNAME_LEN + 1".
I'm fine with doing either of these things. Let's hear from others.
I've added a CF entry - https://commitfest.postgresql.org/40/3927/
--
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2022-10-04 12:58:17 | Re: [patch] \g with multiple result sets and \watch with copy queries |
Previous Message | Ranier Vilela | 2022-10-04 12:25:39 | Re: Reducing the chunk header sizes on all memory context types |