Re: Diagnostic comment in LogicalIncreaseXminForSlot

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Kapila
Тема Re: Diagnostic comment in LogicalIncreaseXminForSlot
Дата
Msg-id CAA4eK1+UnNNw_o=dM0m+sLKo4ePOOc+Lb7p_iN7GhuEQdZH2-A@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Diagnostic comment in LogicalIncreaseXminForSlot  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Diagnostic comment in LogicalIncreaseXminForSlot
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 12:54 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 6:00 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> >
> > It's there in CF. I am fine with PG-15. It will be good to patch the back-branches to have this extra diagnostic
informationavailable.
 
>
> The patch looks to me.
>

{
  slot->candidate_catalog_xmin = xmin;
  slot->candidate_xmin_lsn = current_lsn;
+ elog(DEBUG1, "got new catalog_xmin %u at %X/%X", xmin,
+ LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(current_lsn));
  }
  SpinLockRelease(&slot->mutex);

Today, again looking at this patch, I don't think doing elog inside
spinlock is a good idea. We can either release spinlock before it or
use some variable to remember that we need to write such an elog and
do it after releasing the lock. What do you think? I have noticed that
a nearby function LogicalIncreaseRestartDecodingForSlot() logs similar
information after releasing spinlock, so it is better to follow the
same here as well.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: David Rowley
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Record a Bitmapset of non-pruned partitions
Следующее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side