Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code
Date
Msg-id 0c247a78-9dac-4584-8e87-39f2b45bec68@iki.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Responses Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code
Re: Refactoring backend fork+exec code
List pgsql-hackers
On 22/02/2024 02:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 15/02/2024 07:09, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 3:07 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>>>> I think the last remaining question here is about the 0- vs 1-based indexing
>>>> of BackendIds. Is it a good idea to switch to 0-based indexing? And if we do
>>>> it, should we reserve PGPROC 0. I'm on the fence on this one.
>>>
>>> I lean towards it being a good idea. Having two internal indexing schemes was
>>> bad enough so far, but at least one would fairly quickly notice if one used
>>> the wrong one. If they're just offset by 1, it might end up taking longer,
>>> because that'll often also be a valid id.
>>
>> Yeah, I think making everything 0-based is probably the best way
>> forward long term. It might require more cleanup work to get there,
>> but it's just a lot simpler in the end, IMHO.
> 
> Here's another patch version that does that. Yeah, I agree it's nicer in
> the end.
> 
> I'm pretty happy with this now. I'll read through these patches myself
> again after sleeping over it and try to get this committed by the end of
> the week, but another pair of eyes wouldn't hurt.

And pushed. Thanks for the reviews!

-- 
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jelte Fennema-Nio
Date:
Subject: Re: Make query cancellation keys longer
Next
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation