RE: Parallel copy
От | Hou, Zhijie |
---|---|
Тема | RE: Parallel copy |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 37f541303fe747d2aa23fbcbbad12c25@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Parallel copy (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Parallel copy
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi I found some issue in v9-0002 1. + + elog(DEBUG1, "[Worker] Processing - line position:%d, block:%d, unprocessed lines:%d, offset:%d, line size:%d", + write_pos, lineInfo->first_block, + pg_atomic_read_u32(&data_blk_ptr->unprocessed_line_parts), + offset, pg_atomic_read_u32(&lineInfo->line_size)); + write_pos or other variable to be printed here are type of uint32, I think it'better to use '%u' in elog msg. 2. + * line_size will be set. Read the line_size again to be sure if it is + * completed or partial block. + */ + dataSize = pg_atomic_read_u32(&lineInfo->line_size); + if (dataSize) It use dataSize( type int ) to get uint32 which seems a little dangerous. Is it better to define dataSize uint32 here? 3. Since function with 'Cstate' in name has been changed to 'CState' I think we can change function PopulateCommonCstateInfo as well. 4. + if (pcdata->worker_line_buf_count) I think some check like the above can be 'if (xxx > 0)', which seems easier to understand. Best regards, houzj
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: