Re: PATCH: add pg_current_xlog_flush_location function - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: PATCH: add pg_current_xlog_flush_location function
Date
Msg-id CANP8+jLjCR=xeNZDRfyg=AkqkPSYhVfuiN=dmot5PsgyCN01XA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PATCH: add pg_current_xlog_flush_location function  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: PATCH: add pg_current_xlog_flush_location function  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 11 January 2016 at 12:01, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

On 01/11/2016 06:30 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:

Updating LogwrtResult directly when calling your new function
GetXLogFlushRecPtr() does not strike me as a particularly good idea
per this portion in XLogFlush():
>
     /* Quick exit if already known flushed */
     if (record <= LogwrtResult.Flush)
         return;

The same counts for GetXLogWriteRecPtr, we had better allocate the
value in an independent variable as there are checks using it. For
now it does not matter much for the write position because all the
code paths doing the checks explicitly update again the pointer
before looking at it but it seems to me that using an independent
variable would make the code more robust.

Why? LogwrtResult only serves as a local cache of shared values, so there should be no danger of skipping something.

Comments in xlog.c say

"In addition to the shared variable, each backend has a private copy of LogwrtResult, which is updated when convenient."


It is therefore valid to update the value of both Write and Flush positions at the same time, any time either is required.


My suggested commit pattern for this is...

1. Update existing function to maintain LogwrtResult more eagerly (separate patch)

2. Have the patch use the existing function name (main patch)

--
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Weighted Stats
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Speedup twophase transactions