From: | Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: TODO: Split out pg_resetxlog output into pre- and post-sections |
Date: | 2013-11-29 04:30:13 |
Message-ID: | BF2827DCCE55594C8D7A8F7FFD3AB7713DDAF32F@SZXEML508-MBX.china.huawei.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 29 November 2013, Amit Kapila Wrote:
> >> >> Further Review of this patch:
> >> >> b. why to display 'First log segment after reset' in 'Currrent
> >> >> pg_control values' section as now the same information
> >> >> is available in new section "Values to be used after reset:" ?
> >> >
> >> > May not be always. Suppose if user has given new value of seg no
> >> > and
> >> TLI, then it will be different.
> >> > Otherwise it will be same.
> >> > So now I have changed the code in such way that the value of XLOG
> >> > segment # read from checkpoint record gets printed as part of
> >> > current value and any further new value gets printed in Values to
> >> > be reset (This will be always at-least one plus the current value).
> >> > Because of
> >> following code in FindEndOfXLOG
> >> > xlogbytepos = newXlogSegNo *
> >> ControlFile.xlog_seg_size;
> >> > newXlogSegNo = (xlogbytepos + XLogSegSize
> -
> >> > 1)
> >> / XLogSegSize;
> >> > newXlogSegNo++;
> >>
> >> It can be different, but I don't think we should display it in both
> >> sections because:
> >> a. it doesn't belong to control file.
> >> b. if you carefully look at original link
> >> (http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1283277511-sup-2152@alvh.no-
> >> ip.org),
> >> these values are not getting displayed in pg_control values
> section.
> >>
> >> So I suggest it is better to remove it from pg_control values
> section.
> >
> > Done as per suggestion.
>
> I have done few more cosmetic changes in your patch, please find the
> updated patch attached with this mail.
> Kindly check once whether changes are okay.
Changes are fine. Thanks you.
Thanks and Regards,
Kumar Rajeev Rastogi
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2013-11-29 05:27:49 | Re: Re: Suggestion: Issue warning when calling SET TRANSACTION outside transaction block |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-11-29 04:17:02 | Re: TODO: Split out pg_resetxlog output into pre- and post-sections |