From: | Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Use read streams in CREATE DATABASE command when the strategy is wal_log |
Date: | 2024-07-20 12:01:31 |
Message-ID: | CAN55FZ1bOfGBszLqO_YF-wb0tCQa_PeHouf3Np0OA0N+Vy++eA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 at 14:27, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 02:11:13PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > v4 is attached.
>
> Removal of the PinBufferForBlock() comment about the "persistence =
> RELPERSISTENCE_PERMANENT" fallback started to feel like a loss. I looked for
> a way to re-add a comment about the fallback.
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c.gcov.html
> shows no test coverage of that fallback, and I think the fallback is
> unreachable. Hence, I've removed the fallback in a separate commit. I've
> pushed that and your three patches. Thanks.
Thanks for the separate commit and push!
With the separate commit (e00c45f685), does it make sense to rename
the smgr_persistence parameter of the ReadBuffer_common() to
persistence? Because, ExtendBufferedRelTo() calls ReadBuffer_common()
with rel's persistence now, not with smgr's persistence.
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2024-07-20 12:09:30 | Re: Report search_path value back to the client. |
Previous Message | Andrey M. Borodin | 2024-07-20 11:46:23 | Re: UUID v7 |