public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <[email protected]>
To: 'Peter Smith' <[email protected]>
To: Aya Iwata (Fujitsu) <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2025 02:05:36 +0000
Message-ID: <OSCPR01MB14966FC50CFB457938763AE09F5EEA@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHut+PuuOKKW2oDT0Z8q+UXsiteS67j6G6075FC3aAxeR0cxHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <OS7PR01MB11964335F36BE41021B62EAE8EAE4A@OS7PR01MB11964.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<OSCPR01MB149662AEA64F4E66F494C2584F5E3A@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<[email protected]>
<OS7PR01MB119648846BA926C096CE016B6EAE3A@OS7PR01MB11964.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<CAHut+Pt4Tn1bQYCsYeUt_gtcSB-KOTtRB70SLghkpsjfKGsm7w@mail.gmail.com>
<OS7PR01MB119642CFE4F4DCF7FBBD040BBEAE0A@OS7PR01MB11964.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<CAHut+Pu-nxNice547eGEW2O3hdRcFbPYWF4HiqktZO19X3Ah-g@mail.gmail.com>
<OS7PR01MB11964628A74081DFCA442CBADEAE1A@OS7PR01MB11964.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<CAHut+PuuOKKW2oDT0Z8q+UXsiteS67j6G6075FC3aAxeR0cxHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Dear Peter, Iwata-san,
> 1a.
> It's not clear to me what you were trying to convey by saying "unless
> slot has been used" in the comment. Maybe you meant "unless slot is
> not in use", but is that useful even to say? Anyway, the comment as-is
> seems incorrect.
Agreed to update the comment. How about:
Iterate through slots, looking for workers who connects to the given database.
> 1b.
> Sorry for wavering on this, but now that I see the resulting v4 code,
> I feel we don't really need any of those 'continues', and more if
> conditions can be combined. It becomes simpler. See if you agree.
Ether way is fine for me.
> /*
> * Terminate all background workers for this database, if
> * they had requested it (BGWORKER_EXIT_AT_DATABASE_DROP).
> */
> TerminateBackgroundWorkersForDB(databaseId);
The code comment looks OK. Regarding the function name, I want to propose
an alternative - TerminateBackgroundWorkersByOid().
Core codes have already had several xxxByOid() functions.
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
view thread (67+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Termination of Background Workers for ALTER/DROP DATABASE
In-Reply-To: <OSCPR01MB14966FC50CFB457938763AE09F5EEA@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox