Re: [Patch] remove duplicated smgrclose

From: Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Steven Niu <niushiji(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Patch] remove duplicated smgrclose
Date: 2025-03-11 01:38:13
Message-ID: CAEG8a3JSfpyKPEiJ7fsxuhxh3oCSMLW2=P9HZ5LWEiNEoyRkKw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> Hi, Masahiko
>
> Thanks for your comments! I understand your concern as you stated.
> However, my initial patch was split into two parts as Kirill suggested.
> This thread is about the first part. Another part is here: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/5149/
> Or you can take a look at the v2-0001-remove-duplicated-smgrclose.patch in this thread for the complete change.
>
> I think either we review the v2-patch, or review the both 5149 and 5196 CFs, for my complete change.
> There should be no missing operations.

@@ -482,13 +482,11 @@ smgrdounlinkall(SMgrRelation *rels, int nrels,
bool isRedo)
for (i = 0; i < nrels; i++)
{
RelFileLocatorBackend rlocator = rels[i]->smgr_rlocator;
- int which = rels[i]->smgr_which;

rlocators[i] = rlocator;

/* Close the forks at smgr level */
- for (forknum = 0; forknum <= MAX_FORKNUM; forknum++)
- smgrsw[which].smgr_close(rels[i], forknum);
+ smgrclose(rels[i]);
}

Yeah, you are adjusting the behavior by moving the `smgrclose` operation
after the `smgrdounlinkall` to the `smgrdounlinkall` function itself.

Seems no missing operations in v2-patch. Thanks.

>
> Please let me know if you have more comments.
>
> Best Regards,
> Steven

--
Regards
Junwang Zhao

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Harris 2025-03-11 01:39:55 Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS
Previous Message John Naylor 2025-03-11 01:30:30 Re: CRC32C Parallel Computation Optimization on ARM