Re: Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9580.1464715485@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS:
autovacuum stress-testing our system
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 05/31/2016 06:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'm confused here --- are you speaking of having removed >> if (msg->cutoff_time > req->request_time) >> req->request_time = msg->cutoff_time; >> ? That is not a check for clock skew, it's intending to be sure that >> req->request_time reflects the latest request for this DB when we've >> seen more than one request. But since req->request_time isn't >> actually being used anywhere, it's useless code. > Ah, you're right. I've made the mistake of writing the e-mail before > drinking any coffee today, and I got distracted by the comment change. >> I reformatted the actual check for clock skew, but I do not think I >> changed its behavior. > I'm not sure it does not change the behavior, though. request_time only > became unused after you removed the two places that set the value (one > of them in the clock skew check). Well, it's unused in the sense that the if-test quoted above is the only place in HEAD that examines the value of request_time. And since that if-test only controls whether we change the value, and not whether we proceed to make the clock skew check, I don't see how it's related to clock skew or indeed anything else at all. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: