Re: Is it correct to update db state in control file as "shutting down" during end-of-recovery checkpoint?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is it correct to update db state in control file as "shutting down" during end-of-recovery checkpoint?
Date: 2022-01-26 00:57:59
Message-ID: YfCcl5yvktiVD1fA@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 07:20:05PM +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> I looked into removing the "shutdown" variable in favor of using
> "flags" everywhere, but the patch was quite messy and repetitive. I
> think another way to make things less confusing is to replace
> "shutdown" with an inverse variable called "online." The attached
> patch does it this way.

Yeah, that sounds like a good compromise. At least, I find the whole
a bit easier to follow.

Heikki was planning to commit a large refactoring of xlog.c, so we'd
better wait for that to happen before concluding here.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2022-01-26 01:09:06 Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2022-01-26 00:54:43 Re: GUC flags