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

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Ryoga Yoshida
Тема
Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly
Дата
Msg-id
d2b1d40be36e8d7823a0b0ddc85f31ab@oss.nttdata.com
Ответ на
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:
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
FAQ