At Fri, 28 Apr 2017 10:20:48 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com>
wrote in <CAD21AoBY9UvS9QLrmaENGBGfQKOfGkGaLm=uyh24gmf-6ca...@mail.gmail.com>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > On 4/27/17 06:47, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> >> One thing I am missing in your patch however is cleanup of entries for
> >> relations that finished sync. I wonder if it would be enough to just
> >> destroy the hash when we get to empty list.
> >
> > I had omitted that because the amount of memory "leaked" is not much,
> > but I guess it wouldn't hurt to clean it up.
> >
> > How about the attached?
> >
This seems rasonable enough.
> Thank you for updating patch!
>
> + /*
> + * Clean up the hash table when we're done with all tables (just to
> + * release the bit of memory).
> + */
> + else if (!table_states && last_start_times)
> + {
>
> Isn't it better to use != NIL instead as follows?
>
> else if (table_state != NIL && last_start_times)
Definitely!, but maybe should be reverse condition.
- if (table_states && !last_start_times)
+ if (table_states != NIL && !last_start_times)
===
- else if (!table_states && last_start_times)
+ else if (table_states == NIL && last_start_times)
reagrds,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
