On 2021/03/12 13:49, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
At Fri, 12 Mar 2021 10:38:00 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote in
At Fri, 12 Mar 2021 10:03:31 +0900, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com>
wrote in
I moved archiver from the current location to next to "walsenders"
that is to be terminated along with archiver.
The attached the only 0003 of the new version based on the last one
from Fujii-san.
Thanks for updating the patch! But you forgot to add the changes
related to pgprocno into the patch?
Although I intentinally didn't do that because "it really doesn't
matter", please wait for a while for the new version. I'm going to
make PgArchData have only one member procno instead of replacing the
struct with a single variable.
I noticed that I accidentally removed the launch-suppression feature
that is to avoid frequent relaunching. That mechanism is needed on
the postmaster side. I added PgArchIsSuppressed() to do the same check
with the old pgarch_start() and make it called as a part of
PgArchStartupAllowed().
You're right! At least for me the function name PgArchIsSuppressed() sounds not
good to me. What about something like PgArchCanRestart()?
This is not fault of this patch. But last_pgarch_start_time should be
initialized with zero?
+ if ((curtime - last_pgarch_start_time) < PGARCH_RESTART_INTERVAL)
+ return true;
Why did you remove the cast to unsigned int there?
+ /*
+ * Advertise our latch that backends can use to wake us up while we're
+ * sleeping.
+ */
+ PgArch->pgprocno = MyProc->pgprocno;
The comment should be updated?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
