On Sun, Aug 07, 2022 at 10:41:49AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > Agree. I separated out the changes.
+ +/* + * A convenience wrapper for pwritev() that retries on partial write. If an + * error is returned, it is unspecified how much has been written. + */ +ssize_t +pg_pwritev_with_retry(int fd, const struct iovec *iov, int iovcnt, off_t offset) If moving this routine, this could use a more explicit description, especially on errno, for example, that could be consumed by the caller on failure to know what's happening. >> +/* >> + * A convenience wrapper for pg_pwritev_with_retry() that zero-fills the >> given >> + * file of size total_sz in batches of size block_sz. >> + */ >> +ssize_t >> +pg_pwritev_with_retry_and_init(int fd, int total_sz, int block_sz) >> >> Hmm, why not give it a proper name that says it writes zeroes? > > Done. FWIW, when it comes to that we have a couple of routines that just use '0' to mean such a thing, aka palloc0(). I find 0002 confusing, as it introduces in fe_utils.c a new wrapper (pg_pwritev_with_retry_and_write_zeros) on what's already a wrapper (pg_pwritev_with_retry) for pwrite(). A second thing is that pg_pwritev_with_retry_and_write_zeros() is designed to work on WAL segments initialization and it uses XLOG_BLCKSZ and PGAlignedXLogBlock for the job, but there is nothing in its name that tells us so. This makes me question whether file_utils.c is a good location for this second thing. Could a new file be a better location? We have a xlogutils.c in the backend, and a name similar to that in src/common/ would be one possibility. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
