| From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> | 
| Cc: | k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: please update ps display for recovery checkpoint | 
| Date: | 2020-09-10 02:00:50 | 
| Message-ID: | 20200910020050.GB18552@telsasoft.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 03:52:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 05:09:05PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > That could be helpful.  Wouldn't it be better to use "end-of-recovery
> > checkpoint" instead?  That's the common wording in the code comments.
> > 
> > I don't see the point of patch 0002.  In the same paragraph, we
> > already know that this applies to any checkpoints.
> 
> Thinking more about this..  Could it be better to just add some calls
> to set_ps_display() directly in CreateCheckPoint()?  This way, both
> the checkpointer as well as the startup process at the end of recovery
> would benefit from the change.
What would you want the checkpointer's ps to say ?
Normally it just says:
postgres  3468  3151  0 Aug27 ?        00:20:57 postgres: checkpointer                                
Or do you mean do the same thing as now, but one layer lower, like:
@@ -8728,6 +8725,9 @@ CreateCheckPoint(int flags)
+       if (flags & CHECKPOINT_END_OF_RECOVERY)
+               set_ps_display("recovery checkpoint");
-- 
Justin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-09-10 02:07:06 | Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux | 
| Previous Message | tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com | 2020-09-10 01:38:15 | RE: Global snapshots |