On 2021/02/17 13:52, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 11:47:52PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2021/02/16 15:50, Michael Paquier wrote:
+ /*
+ * Read "writtenUpto" without holding a spinlock. So it may not be
+ * consistent with other WAL receiver's shared variables protected by a
+ * spinlock. This is OK because that variable is used only for
+ * informational purpose and should not be used for data integrity checks.
+ */
What about the following?
"Read "writtenUpto" without holding a spinlock. Note that it may not
be consistent with the other shared variables of the WAL receiver
protected by a spinlock, but this should not be used for data
integrity checks."
Sounds good. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
Thanks, looks good to me.
Pushed. Thanks!
I agree that what has been done with MyProc->waitStart in 46d6e5f is
not safe, and that initialization should happen once at postmaster
startup, with a write(0) when starting the backend. There are two of
them in proc.c, one in twophase.c. Do you mind if I add an open item
for this one?
Yeah, please feel free to do that! BTW, I already posted the patch
addressing that issue, at [1].
Okay, item added with a link to the original thread.
Thanks!
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
