Re: Rename ShmemVariableCache and initialize it in more standard way
От | Richard Guo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Rename ShmemVariableCache and initialize it in more standard way |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMbWs49UvmEqtZm5B9Xw_9Y0j0CUq26j-kj+8_1KbpELM0ZTGg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Rename ShmemVariableCache and initialize it in more standard way ("Tristan Partin" <tristan@neon.tech>) |
Ответы |
Re: Rename ShmemVariableCache and initialize it in more standard way
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 12:31 AM Tristan Partin <tristan@neon.tech> wrote:
On Mon Dec 4, 2023 at 6:49 AM CST, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> This came up in the "Refactoring backend fork+exec code" thread recently
> [0], but is independent of that work:
>
> Here's a patch to allocate and initialize it with a pair of ShmemSize
> and ShmemInit functions, like all other shared memory structs.
>
> + if (!IsUnderPostmaster)
> + {
> + Assert(!found);
> + memset(ShmemVariableCache, 0, sizeof(VariableCacheData));
> + }
> + else
> + Assert(found);
Should the else branch instead be a fatal log?
The Assert here seems OK to me. We do the same when initializing
commitTsShared/MultiXactState. I think it would be preferable to adhere
to this convention.
commitTsShared/MultiXactState. I think it would be preferable to adhere
to this convention.
Patches look good to me.
Also +1 to the patches.
Thanks
Richard
Thanks
Richard
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: