Thread: [HACKERS] Refactoring of replication commands using printsimple
Hi all, This is a follow up of the refactoring that has been discussed in the thread to increase the default size of WAL segments: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqQ4hyNrLq+W1JrrYVSySOxuQa40PYb2Uw5UQkKaG4hong@mail.gmail.com The discussion has resulted in the creation of a84069d9 that has introduced a new DestReceiver method called printsimple that does not need any catalog access. After some investigation, I have noticed that a couple of messages used in the replication protocol could be refactored as well: - IDENTIFY_SYSTEM - TIMELINE_HISTORY - CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT This results in the following code reduction: 3 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-) A commit fest entry has been created: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/13/978/ Thanks, -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Attachment
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:19 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > This is a follow up of the refactoring that has been discussed in the > thread to increase the default size of WAL segments: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqQ4hyNrLq+W1JrrYVSySOxuQa40PYb2Uw5UQkKaG4hong@mail.gmail.com > > The discussion has resulted in the creation of a84069d9 that has > introduced a new DestReceiver method called printsimple that does not > need any catalog access. After some investigation, I have noticed that > a couple of messages used in the replication protocol could be > refactored as well: > - IDENTIFY_SYSTEM > - TIMELINE_HISTORY > - CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT > This results in the following code reduction: > 3 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-) > > A commit fest entry has been created: > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/13/978/ Sorry, I have a little more nitpicking. How about having printsimple() use pq_sendcountedtext() instead of pq_sendint() followed by pq_sendbytes(), as it does for TEXTOID? Other than that, this looks fine to me now. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry, I have a little more nitpicking. Thanks for the input. > How about having > printsimple() use pq_sendcountedtext() instead of pq_sendint() > followed by pq_sendbytes(), as it does for TEXTOID? > > Other than that, this looks fine to me now. pq_sendcountedtext() does some encoding conversion, which is why I haven't used because we deal only with integers in this patch... Now if you wish to switch to that I have really no arguments against. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Attachment
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 8:26 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > pq_sendcountedtext() does some encoding conversion, which is why I > haven't used because we deal only with integers in this patch... Now > if you wish to switch to that I have really no arguments against. OK, I see. Well, I guess it's sensible either way, but I've committed this version. Thanks. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 8:26 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> pq_sendcountedtext() does some encoding conversion, which is why I >> haven't used because we deal only with integers in this patch... Now >> if you wish to switch to that I have really no arguments against. > > OK, I see. Well, I guess it's sensible either way, but I've committed > this version. Thanks. Thanks. -- Michael