Message-ID: <fc1ed66f-e95a-4d10-a4f7-7fa4bb9a7084@oss.nttdata.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2025 19:31:25 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: CHECKPOINT unlogged data
To: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
 PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
References: <aDnaKTEf-0dLiEfz@msg.df7cb.de>
 <vp4cewuyo2cw4fk5sxjaovllhe3dscixxo2utu3cgqhzydrqec@wc2nhgx4khpk>
 <aDnl5N1u7UBYVaSt@nathan> <aDnpeJ99HhoMgJ40@msg.df7cb.de>
 <7x6gsmev36zzh6lfzydkddbhpnxqgu2k2l2ci2k6foxhrstvj2@bn55g54wjrl4>
 <aEK88AwaYBNK1p-O@msg.df7cb.de>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
In-Reply-To: <aEK88AwaYBNK1p-O@msg.df7cb.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/fc1ed66f-e95a-4d10-a4f7-7fa4bb9a7084%40oss.nttdata.com>
Precedence: bulk


On 2025/06/06 19:03, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Andres Freund
>> I'd add a 'mode' that can be set to an arbitrary string, which then can be
>> validated in C code. That seems more future proof.
> 
> Changed in the attached v2, thanks.

When I applied the patch and compiled it, I got the following warnings:

utility.c:946:4: warning: label followed by a declaration is a C23 extension [-Wc23-extensions]
   946 |                         CheckPointStmt   *stmt = (CheckPointStmt *) parsetree;
       |                         ^
utility.c:947:16: warning: mixing declarations and code is incompatible with standards before C99 [-Wdeclaration-after-statement]
   947 |                         ListCell   *lc;
       |                                     ^
2 warnings generated.


			RequestCheckpoint(CHECKPOINT_WAIT |
+							  (immediate ? CHECKPOINT_IMMEDIATE : 0) |
+							  (flush_all ? CHECKPOINT_FLUSH_ALL : 0) |

Some users might want to trigger a spread checkpoint but not wait for
it to finish, since it could take a long time? If that's a valid use case,
maybe we should add a WAIT option to let users choose whether to wait for
the checkpoint to complete or not?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA Japan Corporation