Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?
Date
Msg-id 20230822020632.GA565843@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 10:50:01AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 06:44:07PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> I'm hoping there's a simpler path forward here.  pg_rewind only needs the
>> following lines from fd.h:
>> 
>>     /* Filename components */
>>     #define PG_TEMP_FILES_DIR "pgsql_tmp"
>>     #define PG_TEMP_FILE_PREFIX "pgsql_tmp"
>> 
>> Maybe we could move these to file_utils.h instead.  WDYT?
> 
> I guess so..  At the same time, something can be said about
> pg_checksums that redeclares PG_TEMP_FILE_PREFIX and PG_TEMP_FILES_DIR
> because it does not want to include fd.h and its sync routines.

This would look something like the attached patch.  I think this is nicer.
With this patch, we don't have to choose between including fd.h or
redefining the macros in the frontend code.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: should frontend tools use syncfs() ?
Next
From: Jian Guo
Date:
Subject: Re: Wrong rows estimations with joins of CTEs slows queries by more than factor 500