On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 7:52 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:44 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 7:54 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I've attached the patch. In addition to the test Vignesh prepared, I > > > added one test for the message for creating a slot that checks if the > > > statistics are initialized after re-creating the same name slot. > > > Please review it. > > > > Overall the patch looks good to me. However, I have one question, I > > did not understand the reason behind moving the below code from > > "pgstat_reset_replslot_counter" to "pg_stat_reset_replication_slot"? > > Andres pointed out that pgstat_reset_replslot_counter() acquires lwlock[1]: > > --- > - pgstat_reset_replslot_counter() acquires ReplicationSlotControlLock. I > think pgstat.c has absolutely no business doing things on that level. > --- > > I changed the code so that pgstat_reset_replslot_counter() doesn't > acquire directly lwlock but I think that it's appropriate to do the > existence check for slots in pgstatfunc.c rather than pgstat.c.
Thanks for pointing that out. It makes sense to me. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
