On 2020-Nov-24, Anastasia Lubennikova wrote:
> On 04.09.2020 20:13, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Re general routine: On second thought, it might actually be worth having
> > it. Even just for LSNs - there's plenty places where it's useful to
> > ensure a variable is at least a certain size. I think I would be in
> > favor of a general helper function.
> Do you mean by general helper function something like this?
>
> void
> swap_lsn(XLogRecPtr old_value, XLogRecPtr new_value, bool to_largest)
Something like that, yeah, though maybe name it "pg_atomic_increase_lsn"
or some similar name that makes it clear that
1. it is supposed to use atomics
2. it can only be used to *advance* a value rather than a generic swap.
(I'm not 100% clear that that's the exact API we need.)
> This CF entry was inactive for a while. Alvaro, are you going to continue
> working on it?
Yes, please move it forward. I'll post an update sometime before the
next CF.