On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote: > On 07/03/2017 06:30 PM, Chapman Flack wrote: >> Although it's moot in the straightforward approach of re-zeroing in >> the loop, it would still help my understanding of the system to know >> if there is some subtlety that would have broken what I proposed >> earlier, which was an extra flag to AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() that >> would tell it not only to skip initializing headers, but also to >> skip the WaitXLogInsertionsToFinish() check ... because I have >> the entire region reserved and I hold all the writer slots >> at that moment, it seems safe to assure AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() >> that there are no outstanding writes to wait for. > > Yeah, I suppose that would work, too.
FWIW, I would rather see any optimization done in AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() instead of seeing a second memset re-zeroing the WAL page header after its data has been initialized by AdvanceXLInsertBuffer() once. That's too late for 10, but you still have time for a patch to be integrated in 11. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
