Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYKKNSNE--WSSf=F57PqjW_HDTtTE0_QGV7A+ms2FNnyg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 1:01 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> Done, along with that, I have also got the hunk of smgropen and
> smgrclose in ScanSourceDatabasePgClass() which I had in v1 patch[1].
> Because here we do not want to reuse the smgr of the pg_class again so
> instead of closing at the end with smgrcloserellocator() we can just
> keep the smgr reference and close immediately after getting the number
> of blocks.  Whereas in CreateAndCopyRelationData and
> RelationCopyStorageUsingBuffer() we are using the smgr of the source
> and dest relation multiple time so it make sense to not close it
> immediately and we can close while exiting the function with
> smgrcloserellocator().

As far as I know, this 0001 addresses all outstanding comments and
fixes the reported bug.

Does anyone think otherwise?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zhihong Yu
Date:
Subject: Re: avoid negating LONG_MIN in cash_out()
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: tests and meson - test names and file locations