From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, andrey(dot)chudnovskiy(at)microsoft(dot)com, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Log connection establishment timings |
Date: | 2025-03-05 08:53:15 |
Message-ID: | Z8gQ+3jLa6qUu5E7@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 05:47:26PM -0500, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 9:07 AM Bertrand Drouvot
> <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I did not imagine that much ;-) I was just seeing this code being duplicated
> > and just thought about to avoid the duplication. But now that I read your comments
> > above then I think we could just macro-ize the child_type check (as you mentioned
> > up-thread). That would avoid the risk to forget to update the 3 locations doing the
> > exact same check should we add a new child type in the game.
>
> Is there a word we could use to describe what B_BACKEND and
> B_WAL_SENDER have in common? They are the only backend types that will
> go through the kind of external connection establishment steps (I
> think), but I don't know a very accurate way to make that distinction
> (which is required to come up with a useful macro name).
Yeah, what about IS_CONNECTION_TIMED_BACKEND?
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2025-03-05 09:04:25 | Re: Why doesn't GiST VACUUM require a super-exclusive lock, like nbtree VACUUM? |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2025-03-05 08:44:05 | Re: Separate GUC for replication origins |