| From: | <furuyao(at)pm(dot)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <teranishih(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_receivexlog --status-interval add fsync feedback |
| Date: | 2014-08-18 10:55:36 |
| Message-ID: | A9C510524E235E44AE909CD4027AE196BF7C70D193@MBX-MSG-SV03.msg.nttdata.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for the review!
> One question is why reply_fsync is defined as volatile variable?
> Sorry I could not understand reason of that.
It was affected to time_to_abort -- since it is unnecessary, it deletes.
> Currently patch modifies argument of some function (e.g., Handle
> CopyStream, Process LogDate Msg), and add the similar code to each
> function.
> I don't think it is good approach.
> For example, I think that we should gather these code into one function.
Feedback was judged immediately after each fsync until now.
I revised it in reference to walreceiver.
Feedback of fsync is judged together with the judgment of --status-interval.
Thereby, the specification to an argument became minimum.
Regards,
--
Furuya Osamu
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pg_receivexlog-fsync-feedback-v3.patch | application/octet-stream | 8.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rahila Syed | 2014-08-18 11:19:48 | Fwd: [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes |
| Previous Message | Asif Naeem | 2014-08-18 10:12:34 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max |