On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 5:15 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 3:44 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 02:30:26PM +0530, vignesh C wrote: > > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 11:21, Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Perhaps the comment should say something like it used to: > > >> /* Fail if there is not enough WAL available. This can happen during > > >> shutdown. */ > > > > > > Agree with this, +1 for this change. > > > > That would be an improvement. Would you like to send a patch with all > > the areas you think could stand for improvements? > > -- > > OK, I attached a patch equivalent of the suggestion in this thread. >
Shouldn't the check for flushptr (if (flushptr < targetPagePtr + reqLen)) be moved immediately after the call to WalSndWaitForWal(). The comment seems to suggests the same: "Make sure we have enough WAL available before retrieving the current timeline. .." -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
