Le 11/08/2010 01:14, Tatsuo Ishii a écrit :
>>>> I had to fix my patch because I didn't take care the backend id. Right
>>>> now, it only looks at backend 0. Not sure this is a sensible thing to
>>>> do, but it would be easy to fix if it's not.
>>>
>>> Can you be more specific?
>>>
>>
>> Sure. In the function processes_reporting() (file
>> pool_process_reporting.c), there is this code:
>>
>> for (pool = 0; pool < pool_config->max_pool; pool++)
>> {
>> poolBE = pool*MAX_NUM_BACKENDS;
>>
>> pool is multiplied by MAX_NUM_BACKENDS to get the right pool id for the
>> backend 0. If I didn't use this operation, I would access pool of
>> inexisting backends.
>
> poolBE = pool*MAX_NUM_BACKENDS points to info for backend 0.
> poolBE+1 points to info for backend 1. So you would want to have inner
> loop something like:
>
> for (i = 0; i< NUM_BACKENDS;i++)
> poolBE = pool*MAX_NUM_BACKENDS + i;
>
> Or you could use pool_coninfo_pid(proc_id, pool, i) to get the pointer
> to ConnectionInfo structure. See around line 474 in pcp_child.c for
> example.
Thanks. I commited a change to take care of the backend ID. Be careful
that I changed the documentation to talk about the new column, you'll
have to update the japanese one.
--
Guillaume
http://www.postgresql.fr
http://dalibo.com
_______________________________________________
Pgpool-hackers mailing list
Pgpool-hackers@pgfoundry.org
http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-hackers
