On Thursday, September 24, 2020 1:27 PM, Tsunakawa-san wrote:
> (1)
> + for (cur_blk = firstDelBlock[j]; cur_blk <
> nblocks; cur_blk++)
>
> The right side of "cur_blk <" should not be nblocks, because nblocks is not
> the number of the relation fork anymore.
Right. Fixed. It should be the total number of (n)blocks of relation.
> (2)
> + BlockNumber nblocks;
> + nblocks = smgrnblocks(smgr_reln, forkNum[j]) -
> firstDelBlock[j];
>
> You should either:
>
> * Combine the two lines into one: BlockNumber nblocks = ...;
>
> or
>
> * Put an empty line between the two lines to separate declarations and
> execution statements.
Right. I separated them in the updated patch. And to prevent confusion,
instead of nblocks, nTotalBlocks & nBlocksToInvalidate are used.
/* Get the total number of blocks for the supplied relation's fork */
nTotalBlocks = smgrnblocks(smgr_reln, forkNum[j]);
/* Get the total number of blocks to be invalidated for the specified fork */
nBlocksToInvalidate = nTotalBlocks - firstDelBlock[j];
> After correcting these, I think you can check the recovery performance.
I'll send performance measurement results in the next email. Thanks a lot for the reviews!
Regards,
Kirk Jamison
