Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly

From: Ryoga Yoshida <bt23yoshidar(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly
Date: 2023-09-25 05:49:50
Message-ID: d2b1d40be36e8d7823a0b0ddc85f31ab@oss.nttdata.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2023-09-25 14:38, Michael Paquier wrote:
> We would not wait on the lock if force=false, which would do
> nowait=true. And !force reads the same to me as force=false.
>
> Anyway, I am OK to remove this part. That seems to confuse you, so
> you may not be the only one who would read this comment.

When I first read it, I didn't read that !force as force=false, so
removing it might be better.

> Another idea would be to do like in pgstat.c by adding the following
> line, then use "nowait" to call each sub-function:
> nowait = !force;
> pgstat_flush_wal(nowait);
> pgstat_flush_io(nowait);

That's very clear and I think it's good.

Ryoga Yoshida

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-09-25 05:58:42 Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2023-09-25 05:45:31 Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node