On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 06:24:18PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> I'm fine with doing either of these things. Let's hear from others.
>
> I've added a CF entry - https://commitfest.postgresql.org/40/3927/
About 0002, I am not sure that it is worth bothering. Sure, this
wastes a few bytes, but
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 2:01 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> > 1. 0001 replaces explicit WAL file parsing code with
>
> Looks good to me.
>
> > 2. 0002 replaces MAXPGPATH with MAXFNAMELEN for WAL file names.
>
> Looks reasonable, too. I don't find other instances of the same mistake.
Thanks for r
At Tue, 4 Oct 2022 13:20:54 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 12:11 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > static uint32 minXlogTli = 0;
> >
> > I have found other three instances of this in xlog.c and
> > pg_receivewal.c. Do they worth fixing?
> >
> > (pg_upg
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 12:11 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> >
> > > static uint32 minXlogTli = 0;
>
> I have found other three instances of this in xlog.c and
> pg_receivewal.c. Do they worth fixing?
>
> (pg_upgarade.c has "uint32 tli/logid/segno but I'm not sure they need
> to be "fixed". At l
At Tue, 04 Oct 2022 15:23:48 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> This is not directly related to this patch, pg_resetwal.c has the
> following line..
>
> > static uint32 minXlogTli = 0;
I have found other three instances of this in xlog.c and
pg_receivewal.c. Do they worth fixing?
(pg_
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 03:17:06PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Nice finding. I found a few '%08X%08X's but they don't seem to fit
> similar fix.
Nice cleanup.
> Couldn't we use XLByteToSeg() here?
>
> Other than that, it looks good to me.
Yep. It looks that you're right here.
--
Michael
At Tue, 04 Oct 2022 15:17:06 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> Other than that, it looks good to me.
Sorry I have another comment.
> - unsigned int tli,
> - log,
> - seg;
> +
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 11:47 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> > - segs_per_xlogid = (UINT64CONST(0x0001) /
> > ControlFile.xlog_seg_size);
> > newXlogSegNo = ControlFile.checkPointCopy.redo /
> > ControlFile.xlog_seg_size;
>
> Couldn't we use XLByteToSeg() here?
Yes, we cou
At Tue, 4 Oct 2022 11:06:15 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> It looks like there's an opportunity to replace explicit WAL file
> parsing code with XLogFromFileName() in pg_resetwal.c. This was not
> done then (in PG 10) because the XLogFromFileName() wasn't accepting
> file size as an input p
Hi,
It looks like there's an opportunity to replace explicit WAL file
parsing code with XLogFromFileName() in pg_resetwal.c. This was not
done then (in PG 10) because the XLogFromFileName() wasn't accepting
file size as an input parameter (see [1]) and pg_resetwal needed to
use WAL file size from
10 matches
Mail list logo
