Request a Demo
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush()
Date
Msg-id cf851c4a5d14b31eded090839f0310319ba71be5.camel@j-davis.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush()  (Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Incorrect logic in XLogNeedsFlush()
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Wed, 2025-09-10 at 11:12 -0400, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> So, would you consider the defining characteristic of whether or not
> we should use the flush pointer instead of min recovery point in
> XLogNeedsFlush() to be whether or not WAL inserts are allowed?

That was my question here:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b4ad535a72fc02ea43076cf525e4dbaa72b00d5b.camel@j-davis.com

It seems like XLogFlush() and XLogNeedsFlush() should use the same
test, otherwise you could always get some confusing inconsistency.
Right?

Regards,
    Jeff Davis

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree
Next
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Generate random dates/times in a specified range