From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
Date: | 2016-03-22 07:03:07 |
Message-ID: | CAFiTN-vwD_J+OAL9MJNWi63NBgLWXQQCh3X2jG5a9LOdQ2GZBw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
I have reviewed the patch.. here are some review comments, I will continue
to review..
1.
+
+ /*
+ * Add the proc to list, if the clog page where we need to update the
+ */
+ if (nextidx != INVALID_PGPROCNO &&
+ ProcGlobal->allProcs[nextidx].clogGroupMemberPage !=
proc->clogGroupMemberPage)
+ return false;
Should we clear all these structure variable what we set above in case we
are not adding our self to group, I can see it will not have any problem
even if we don't clear them,
I think if we don't want to clear we can add some comment mentioning the
same.
+ proc->clogGroupMember = true;
+ proc->clogGroupMemberXid = xid;
+ proc->clogGroupMemberXidStatus = status;
+ proc->clogGroupMemberPage = pageno;
+ proc->clogGroupMemberLsn = lsn;
2.
Here we are updating in our own proc, I think we don't need atomic
operation here, we are not yet added to the list.
+ if (nextidx != INVALID_PGPROCNO &&
+ ProcGlobal->allProcs[nextidx].clogGroupMemberPage !=
proc->clogGroupMemberPage)
+ return false;
+
+ pg_atomic_write_u32(&proc->clogGroupNext, nextidx);
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2016-03-22 07:10:21 | Re: Applying logical replication changes by more than one process |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2016-03-22 07:02:39 | Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 |