Re: [HACKERS] Walsender timeouts and large transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Walsender timeouts and large transactions
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYCnnFXNTk6EuXTxWs9CPg5X5vhOpTYxnsPzjvCfZOKeA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Walsender timeouts and large transactions  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Walsender timeouts and large transactions
Re: [HACKERS] Walsender timeouts and large transactions
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:59 PM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> To me it looks like it's time to get this committed, marking as such.

This version has noticeably more code rearrangement than before, and
I'm not sure that is actually buying us anything.  Why not keep the
changes minimal?

Also, TBH, this doesn't seem to have been carefully reviewed for style:

-    if (!pq_is_send_pending())
-        return;
+    /* Try taking fast path unless we get too close to walsender timeout. */
+    if (now < TimestampTzPlusMilliseconds(last_reply_timestamp,
+                                          wal_sender_timeout / 2))
+    {
+        if (!pq_is_send_pending())
+            return;
+    }

Generally we write if (a && b) { ... } not if (a) { if (b) .. }

-    }
+    };

It's hard to understand how this got through review.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench
Next
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Re: dsa_allocate could not find 4 free pages