Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Ryoga Yoshida <bt23yoshidar(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Doesn't pgstat_report_wal() handle the argument "force" incorrectly
Date: 2023-09-25 05:38:57
Message-ID: ZREc8dGx2EBlJx4x@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 02:16:22PM +0900, Ryoga Yoshida wrote:
> On 2023-09-25 12:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
> in attached file
>> + /* like in pgstat.c, don't wait for lock acquisition when !force */
>
> Isn't it the case with force=true and !force that it doesn't wait for the
> lock acquisition. In fact, force may be false.

We would not wait on the lock if force=false, which would do
nowait=true. And !force reads the same to me as force=false.

Anyway, I am OK to remove this part. That seems to confuse you, so
you may not be the only one who would read this comment.

Another idea would be to do like in pgstat.c by adding the following
line, then use "nowait" to call each sub-function:
nowait = !force;
pgstat_flush_wal(nowait);
pgstat_flush_io(nowait);
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bharath Rupireddy 2023-09-25 05:45:31 Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node
Previous Message Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) 2023-09-25 05:35:18 RE: pg_upgrade and logical replication