Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200421215726.GA26662@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallback promotion?take 2 (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Remove non-fast promotion Re: Should we remove a fallbackpromotion? take 2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Apr-20, Fujii Masao wrote: > + /* > + * In 9.1 and 9.2 the postmaster unlinked the promote file inside the > + * signal handler. It now leaves the file in place and lets the > + * Startup process do the unlink. > + */ > + if (IsPromoteSignaled() && stat(PROMOTE_SIGNAL_FILE, &stat_buf) == 0) > { > - /* > - * In 9.1 and 9.2 the postmaster unlinked the promote file inside the > - * signal handler. It now leaves the file in place and lets the > - * Startup process do the unlink. This allows Startup to know whether > - * it should create a full checkpoint before starting up (fallback > - * mode). Fast promotion takes precedence. > - */ It seems pointless to leave a very old comment that documents what the code no longer does. I thikn it would be better to reword it indicating what the code does do, ie. something like "Leave the signal file in place; it will be removed by the startup process when ..." -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: