On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >>> So I'm having a hard time understanding under what imaginable set of >>> circumstances this might break. > >> Padding inside RelFileNodeBackend would break it, because >> ForwardFsyncRequest copies the rnode as a struct. So that's why I'm >> asking whether we want to establish an explicit requirement that that >> struct not contain any padding. > > BTW, I'd be a lot happier about assuming that bare RelFileNode contains > no padding, because that's at least got all the fields the same type. > So that brings us back to the question of why this code is supporting > fsync requests for local relations in the first place. Couldn't we have > it ignore those, and then only ship RelFileNode to the checkpointer?
That's an awfully good point. I think that was just sloppy coding on my part (cf commit debcec7dc31a992703911a9953e299c8d730c778). +1 for changing it as you suggest. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
