At Tue, 12 Oct 2021 14:57:58 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote in > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 2:03 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > [1] - > > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACXZ_o7rcOb7-Rs96P0d%3DEi%2Bnvf_WZ-Meky7Vv%2BnQNFYjQ%40mail.gmail.com > > > > The patch does this: > > > > case StartupProcess: > > + MyBackendId = MaxBackends + MyAuxProcType + 1; > > > > as well as this: > > > > + shmInvalBuffer->maxBackends = MaxBackends + 1; > > > > These don't seem to be in the strict correspondence. I'd prefer > > something like the following. > > > > + /* currently only StartupProcess uses nailed SI slot */ > > + shmInvalBuffer->maxBackends = MaxBackends + StartupProcess + 1; > > I don't think it is a good idea to use macro StartupProcess (because > the macro might get changed to a different value later). What we
If wo, we shouldn't use MyAuxProcType at the "case StartupProcess". > essentially need to do for procState array is to extend its size by 1 > (for startup process) which is being handled separately in [1]. Once > the patch at [1] gets in, the patch proposed here will not have the > above change at all. > > [1] - > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACXZ_o7rcOb7-Rs96P0d%3DEi%2Bnvf_WZ-Meky7Vv%2BnQNFYjQ%40mail.gmail.com -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
