Re: Misuse of TimestampDifference() in the autoprewarm feature of pg_prewarm

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alexey Kondratov <a(dot)kondratov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Misuse of TimestampDifference() in the autoprewarm feature of pg_prewarm
Date: 2020-11-11 03:59:33
Message-ID: 2464589.1605067173@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alexey Kondratov <a(dot)kondratov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> After looking on the autoprewarm code more closely I have realised that
> this 'double dump' issues was not an issues at all. I have just
> misplaced a debug elog(), so its second output in the log was only
> indicating that we calculated delay_in_ms one more time.

Ah --- that explains why I couldn't see a problem.

I've pushed 0001+0002 plus some followup work to fix other places
that could usefully use TimestampDifferenceMilliseconds(). I have
not done anything with 0003 (the TAP test for pg_prewarm), and will
leave that to the judgment of somebody who's worked with pg_prewarm
before. To me it looks like it's not really testing things very
carefully at all; on the other hand, we have exactly zero test
coverage of that module today, so maybe something is better than
nothing.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2020-11-11 04:11:05 Re: PATCH: Report libpq version and configuration
Previous Message osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com 2020-11-11 03:07:01 RE: Disable WAL logging to speed up data loading