Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqTeSCjCBBOapsCaBymHDjkhuiNjG=KSdr1m7UOHdPUkng@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are few things I have noticed:
> +   for (i = 0; i < max_wal_senders; i++)
> +   {
> +       walsnd = &WalSndCtl->walsnds[i];
> No volatile pointer to prevent code reordering?
>
>   */
>  typedef struct WalSnd
>  {
> +   int     slotno;         /* index of this slot in WalSnd array */
>     pid_t       pid;            /* this walsender's process id, or 0 */
> slotno is used nowhere.
>
> I'll grab the tests and look at them.

So I had a look at those tests and finished with the attached:
- patch 1 adds a reload routine to PostgresNode
- patch 2 the list of tests.

I took the tests from patch 21 and did many tweaks on them:
- Use of qq() instead of quotes
- Removal of hardcoded newlines
- typo fixes and sanity fixes
- etc.
Regards,
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2