Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly
От
Ryoga Yoshida
Тема
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly
Дата
Msg-id
d2b1d40be36e8d7823a0b0ddc85f31ab@oss.nttdata.com
Ответ на
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly (Michael Paquier)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Ryoga Yoshida <bt23yoshidar@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Ryoga Yoshida <bt23yoshidar@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Ryoga Yoshida <bt23yoshidar@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Ryoga Yoshida <bt23yoshidar@oss.nttdata.com>
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
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
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Bharath Rupireddy
Дата: