| From: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Date: | 2024-03-05 07:15:29 |
| Message-ID: | OS0PR01MB571607FE184ADB6A56DE18A794222@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Monday, March 4, 2024 11:44 PM Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 01:28:04PM +0000, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote:
> > Attach the V105 patch set
>
> Thanks!
>
> Sorry I missed those during the previous review:
No problem, thanks for the comments!
>
> 1 ===
>
> Commit message: "these functions will block until"
>
> s/block/wait/ ?
>
> 2 ===
>
> + when used with logical failover slots, will block until all
>
> s/block/wait/ ?
>
> It seems those are the 2 remaining "block" that could deserve the proposed
> above change.
I prefer using 'block' here. And it seems others also suggest
to change the 'wait'[1].
>
> 3 ===
>
> + invalidated = slot->data.invalidated != RS_INVAL_NONE;
> + inactive = slot->active_pid == 0;
>
> invalidated = (slot->data.invalidated != RS_INVAL_NONE); inactive =
> (slot->active_pid == 0);
>
> instead?
>
> I think it's easier to read and it looks like this is the way it's written in other
> places (at least the few I checked).
I think the current code is consistent with other similar code in slot.c.
(grep "data.invalidated != RS_INVAL_NONE").
Best Regards,
Hou zj
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2024-03-05 07:20:15 | RE: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Richard Guo | 2024-03-05 06:47:27 | Re: Eager aggregation, take 3 |