Re: fsync-pgdata-on-recovery tries to write to more files than previously
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: fsync-pgdata-on-recovery tries to write to more files than previously |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19343.1432832680@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: fsync-pgdata-on-recovery tries to write to more files than previously (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: fsync-pgdata-on-recovery tries to write to more files
than previously
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> 2. Robert, are you comfortable with what fsync_pgdata() does in xlog.c? >> I wasn't sure if I should move that to fd.c as well. I think it's >> borderline OK for now. > I think if the function is specific as fsync_pgdata(), fd.c is not the > right place. I'm not sure xlog.c is either, though. ISTM xlog.c is clearly the *wrong* place; if this behavior has anything to do with WAL logging as such, it's not apparent to me. fd.c is not a great place perhaps, but in view of the fact that we have things like RemovePgTempFiles() in there, it's not unreasonable to see fsync_pgdata as something to put there as well (perhaps with a name more chosen to match fd.c names...) Since Robert appears to be busy worrying about the multixact issue reported by Steve Kehlet, I suggest he focus on that and I'll take care of getting this thing committed. AFAICT we have consensus on what it should do and we're down to arguing about code style. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: