>
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 11:41:52AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2021-Apr-06, Nitin Jadhav wrote:
> >
> > > I have reviewed the code. Here are a few minor comments.
> > >
> > > 1.
> > > +void
> > > +pgstat_report_queryid(uint64 queryId, bool force)
> > > +{
> > > + volatile PgBackendStatus *beentry = MyBEEntry;
> > > +
> > > + if (!beentry)
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * if track_activities is disabled, st_queryid should already have
> been
> > > + * reset
> > > + */
> > > + if (!pgstat_track_activities)
> > > + return;
> > >
> > > The above two conditions can be clubbed together in a single condition.
> >
> > I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to put the assignment *after* we
> > have checked the second condition.
> All other pgstat_report_* functions do the assignment before doing any
> test on
> beentry and/or pgstat_track_activities, I think we should keep this code
> consistent.I agree about this. Thanks and Regards, Nitin Jadhav On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 9:18 PM Julien Rouhaud <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 11:41:52AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2021-Apr-06, Nitin Jadhav wrote: > > > > > I have reviewed the code. Here are a few minor comments. > > > > > > 1. > > > +void > > > +pgstat_report_queryid(uint64 queryId, bool force) > > > +{ > > > + volatile PgBackendStatus *beentry = MyBEEntry; > > > + > > > + if (!beentry) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * if track_activities is disabled, st_queryid should already have > been > > > + * reset > > > + */ > > > + if (!pgstat_track_activities) > > > + return; > > > > > > The above two conditions can be clubbed together in a single condition. > > > > I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to put the assignment *after* we > > have checked the second condition. > > All other pgstat_report_* functions do the assignment before doing any > test on > beentry and/or pgstat_track_activities, I think we should keep this code > consistent. >
