| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush() |
| Date: | 2025-09-10 16:58:08 |
| Message-ID: | cf851c4a5d14b31eded090839f0310319ba71be5.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2025-09-10 at 11:12 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> So, would you consider the defining characteristic of whether or not
> we should use the flush pointer instead of min recovery point in
> XLogNeedsFlush() to be whether or not WAL inserts are allowed?
That was my question here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b4ad535a72fc02ea43076cf525e4dbaa72b00d5b.camel@j-davis.com
It seems like XLogFlush() and XLogNeedsFlush() should use the same
test, otherwise you could always get some confusing inconsistency.
Right?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2025-09-10 16:59:08 | Re: [PATCH] Generate random dates/times in a specified range |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2025-09-10 16:54:36 | Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree |