Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nPaFT-00016J-Je for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:27:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nPaFS-0004Ac-If for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:27:18 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nPaFS-0004AT-9L for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:27:18 +0000 Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nPaFQ-0005kX-3R for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:27:17 +0000 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6AF33200C4A; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 20:27:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 02 Mar 2022 20:27:15 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paquier.xyz; h= cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; bh=lzAwV79ZZcbwd9uy+m3V5BdqrTOA+KsrXs5vI4 XTNjw=; b=QbRsMib2nWH2USXYmJ8i2TC0CC6t4v3JJQEB/eLtlY4f9cVJCqaN6p ib0ne37/a7m98J8CTxulCbvIRULeDTS0v/wUN3WVgrQQdcc1xzePTwN6DkWPdfMD q/hQBBqmEBRZ6PeivL1BSC0vyag3ki/Nh5Z5toRVbER0+zFEbmoRQ5J2BW6dW7an YxmV3x5hL+4AdtMEbpb7RbbyHkN8jzNzG9+S8+I2EyOufdjJ/r4248r5dPsgTtSW ZQSMMU8hYZDIxVqfM89hwrCEDMbE/zab3eZKb0IVv4v6GM97gttw5ZpOEsu4b5WR A9bWLFOEHfoe6ciGfKBFRbjeKXTroAHA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=lzAwV79ZZcbwd9uy+ m3V5BdqrTOA+KsrXs5vI4XTNjw=; b=anAlRwtDhmWPFp8XywDkbr3j5LogHF+W0 qUmYUVmqKFTzbxkZDCwySTqBuW5zwr1Kf0k5yOos9kWBWbsW81C0rTdOKlokso3l lYoY4ciRUE+vu0skpC4NWsOsQ48rq3d9UMqbr8AIrkoPR5dF4OVrbMpgDV70f62G H85J8USLXgmE0G4MrUzj0VfZyER8dp53u1P3Z6w7y0fftQXWTAGDfTIbvI1rmFvg Q/89pAy8+HKAT+HrwnunOc/dkexSUGFpbOlH98+dMBwoUaXQWk9Y+pk91jCgmQde ss9af2Y3SbmC5+01hdJxABJyEizda7epSR8RG73rBh7r5CO2qPUDA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddruddthedgfeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucgfrhhlucfvnfffucdlfeehmdenucfjughrpeffhf fvuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddtvdenucfhrhhomhepofhitghhrggvlhcurfgrqhhu ihgvrhcuoehmihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiiiqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrh hnpedvgeduuefhtdeuleettdevjeehheeiveeuieegleetgeeljeelieeuieehgeevhfen ucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmihgthh grvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiii X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 20:27:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:27:10 +0900 From: Michael Paquier To: Kyotaro Horiguchi Cc: bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com, nitinjadhavpostgres@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Add CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED flag to the log message in LogCheckpointStart() Message-ID: References: <20220303.093937.2132907787383572158.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="l0qyNhVbSldOsjxz" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220303.093937.2132907787383572158.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --l0qyNhVbSldOsjxz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:39:37AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > At Wed, 2 Mar 2022 18:18:10 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote in=20 >> I don't think that's useful. Being in LogCheckpointStart >> (CreateCheckPoint or CreateRestartPoint) itself means that somebody >> has requested a checkpoint. Having CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED doesn't add >> any value. >=20 > Agreed. Exactly my impression. This would apply now to the WAL shutdown code paths, and I'd suspect that the callers of CreateCheckPoint() are not going to increase soon. The point is: the logs already provide some contexts for any of those callers so I see no need for this additional information. > Actually no one does but RequestCheckpoint() accepts 0 as flags. > Checkpointer would be a bit more complex without CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED. > I don't think it does us any good to get rid of the flag value. I'd rather keep this code as-is. -- Michael --l0qyNhVbSldOsjxz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAmIgGW4ACgkQnvQgOdby QH2OVw/9GErwROGBR2YRyGX+MSxJtRYbcl1d+0lmsNRNb0B48bN9CE4/MSQZA84W w3h0cvva3klyCzZZnCDOl4jowqsH/u9DuqPKLbCjW66FF0couq7QmuRaE5Wai0Kp R9UPPPQwwparGk5/g3xRHNh3EBpfsGItnRhSTL0FkwaeZMA53Nw7fUUnIHvWvEu8 TFgB3Em3kDzkXMkRWMuEm44Zkxh+NNNknuwFv9Pxl1INnwpRaGz+70nqYjesYb/y ZtpsIOsuUrxFGBcdjsKBbO+DU0wN7AQn+p2hQW9lfeqytxYkFuCZKmwyPOIgP5kJ 9tL/CpzT+zyqkkpbrBeUZxlgPgE7CXATN+IszoHiJ28S06Ykr29zRCrypdeO3slu tULHmutPBgf/s84OcRO9zFGstw3/XMphpL67OzyInqwaqbHi28Ef33hOXVgX+ga+ FkB3ualA4nBGX0yBG92UUkRKYe8ZxAy+cCVLEk8F3zx8WYLmKLwNidbuY6v0U/EN 6qKOvdQSsqejYGEg+6qrOWbRwlEijtghu6MIKmZsxLddmXXkLKmEtgU33hgMD2I6 tPN3LcoxmSGECbf9S2XrtmfI5Y0u+ttrSYF5eQUn328bTs/ZDAUxmBVV1nKbxSsl bshbDRUDA5ghSsWJlvC9d/k8q3BoTpx/aEkDnXR6yyOcPvMUiag= =6ZG3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --l0qyNhVbSldOsjxz--