Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date: 2016-04-07 14:43:57
Message-ID: CAHGQGwGEe33r65P4hsiWZzM0tKDi9uAt0EbdMmkzde5-aJEByw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Here are few things I have noticed:
>> + for (i = 0; i < max_wal_senders; i++)
>> + {
>> + walsnd = &WalSndCtl->walsnds[i];
>> No volatile pointer to prevent code reordering?
>>
>> */
>> typedef struct WalSnd
>> {
>> + int slotno; /* index of this slot in WalSnd array */
>> pid_t pid; /* this walsender's process id, or 0 */
>> slotno is used nowhere.
>>
>> I'll grab the tests and look at them.
>
> So I had a look at those tests and finished with the attached:
> - patch 1 adds a reload routine to PostgresNode
> - patch 2 the list of tests.

Thanks for updating the patches!

Attached is the refactored version of the patch.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

Attachment Content-Type Size
test-n-syncrep.patch text/x-patch 5.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-04-07 14:46:26 Re: Performance improvement for joins where outer side is unique
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2016-04-07 14:26:43 Re: pgbench randomness initialization