From: | Erik Nordström <erik(at)timescale(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Changed behavior in rewriteheap |
Date: | 2024-11-22 15:02:13 |
Message-ID: | CACAa4V+Vbe1BWWnssu30nMBvi8tShn41e_cs-PtUpmbEvFE-eQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 3:53 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> On 22/11/2024 15:56, Erik Nordström wrote:
> > Yes, it solves the issue so it looks good.
> >
> > Just a minor nit: the code uses both blokno as local variable for
> > pending_writes[i].blkno and directly accessing pending_writes[i].blkno.
> > Maybe it is better to just use the local variable. For example, change
> >
> > ++ b/src/backend/storage/smgr/bulk_write.c
> > @@ -304,7 +304,8 @@ smgr_bulk_flush(BulkWriteState *bulkstate)
> > }
> >
> > smgrextend(bulkstate->smgr, bulkstate->forknum,
> > blkno, page, true);
> > - bulkstate->relsize = pending_writes[i].blkno + 1;
> > + bulkstate->relsize++;
> > + Assert(bulkstate->relsize == blkno + 1);
> >
> > Just a suggestion.
>
> Made that change and committed to master and REL_17_STABLE. I didn't
> bother with the assertion though. Also I removed the 'pages_written'
> field, it was not used for anything anymore.
>
Sounds good. Thank you again!
-Erik
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Anthonin Bonnefoy | 2024-11-22 15:30:45 | Re: Consider pipeline implicit transaction as a transaction block |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2024-11-22 14:53:00 | Re: Changed behavior in rewriteheap |