Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Euler Taveira
Тема
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today?
Дата
Msg-id
b687d11a-3ba4-4e8c-83b4-2c4851101422@app.fastmail.com
Ответ на
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? (Peter Eisentraut)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? "Euler Taveira" <euler@eulerto.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? "Euler Taveira" <euler@eulerto.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today? Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023, at 8:27 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 02.12.23 15:06, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> I enabled this code by compiling with the WAL_DEBUG macro and setting
> wal_debug GUC to on. Firstly, the compilation on Windows failed
> because XL_ROUTINE was passed inappropriately for XLogReaderAllocate()
> used.

This kind of thing could be mostly avoided if we didn't hide all the 
WAL_DEBUG behind #ifdefs.

AFAICS LOCK_DEBUG also hides its GUCs behind #ifdefs. The fact that XLOG_DEBUG
is a variable but seems like a constant surprises me. I would rename it to
XLogDebug or xlog_debug.

in the normal case.  That way, we don't need to wrap that in #ifdef 
WAL_DEBUG, and the compiler can see the disabled code and make sure it 
continues to build.

I didn't check the LOCK_DEBUG code path to make sure it fits in the same
category as WAL_DEBUG. If it does, maybe it is worth to apply the same logic
there.


--
Euler Taveira

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Следующее
От: Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
Дата:
FAQ