Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
От | Chapman Flack |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5AB8D9C2.2010208@anastigmatix.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/25/18 23:27, Stephen Frost wrote: >> .travis.yml | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > ... not something that I think we're going to add into the main tree. Looks like that got in by mistake, sorry. > - AdvanceXLInsertBuffer(CurrPos, false); > ... > + currpos = GetXLogBuffer(CurrPos); > > AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() does quite a bit, so I'm a bit surprised to see > this simply removing that call, you're confident there's nothing done > which still needs doing..? My belief from looking at the code was that AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() is among the things GetXLogBuffer() does, so calling both would result in two calls to the former (which I don't believe would hurt, it would only do enough work the second time to determine it had already been done). However, it is done *conditionally* within GetXLogBuffer(), so it doesn't hurt to have extra eyes reviewing my belief that the condition will be true in this case (looping through tail blocks that haven't been touched yet). -Chap
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: