| From: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Regardign RecentFlushPtr in WalSndWaitForWal() |
| Date: | 2024-02-26 11:46:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAJpy0uBSCQz1yMD-WiEthzEe23dti2-Kr_pitVb7vAPFbFKm=A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi hackers,
I would like to understand why we have code [1] that retrieves
RecentFlushPtr in WalSndWaitForWal() outside of the loop. We utilize
RecentFlushPtr later within the loop, but prior to that, we already
have [2]. Wouldn't [2] alone be sufficient?
Just to check the impact, I ran 'make check-world' after removing [1],
and did not see any issue exposed by the test at-least.
Any thoughts?
[1]:
/* Get a more recent flush pointer. */
if (!RecoveryInProgress())
RecentFlushPtr = GetFlushRecPtr(NULL);
else
RecentFlushPtr = GetXLogReplayRecPtr(NULL);
[2]:
/* Update our idea of the currently flushed position. */
else if (!RecoveryInProgress())
RecentFlushPtr = GetFlushRecPtr(NULL);
else
RecentFlushPtr = GetXLogReplayRecPtr(NULL);
thanks
Shveta
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-02-26 11:48:25 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Xing Guo | 2024-02-26 11:42:18 | Re: Control your disk usage in PG: Introduction to Disk Quota Extension |