| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Checkpointer write combining |
| Date: | 2025-09-10 01:28:55 |
| Message-ID: | b4ad535a72fc02ea43076cf525e4dbaa72b00d5b.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2025-09-09 at 13:55 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 11:16 AM Melanie Plageman
> <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > One more fix and a bit more cleanup in attached v4.
>
> Okay one more version: I updated the thread on eager flushing the
> bulkwrite ring [1], and some updates were needed here.
v5-0005 comments:
* Please update the comment above the code change.
* The last paragraph in the commit message has a typo: "potentially
update the local copy of min recovery point, when xlog inserts are
*not* allowed", right?
* Shouldn't the code be consistent between XLogNeedsFlush() and
XLogFlush()? The latter only checks for !XLogInsertAllowed(), whereas
the former also checks for RecoveryInProgress().
I'm still not sure I understand the problem situation this is fixing,
but that's being discussed in another thread.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2025-09-10 01:50:37 | Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush() |
| Previous Message | Quan Zongliang | 2025-09-10 00:31:33 | Re: [BUG] PostgreSQL crashes with ThreadSanitizer during early initialization |