On 2020-03-17 15:47, Kartyshov Ivan wrote:
Synopsis
==========
WAIT FOR [ANY | SOME | ALL] event [, event ...]
I'm confused as to what SOME would mean in this
command's syntax, but I can see you removed it
from gram.y since the last patch. Did you
decide to not implement it after all?
Also, I had a look at the code and tested it a bit.
================
If I specify many events, here's what happens:
For WAIT_FOR_ALL strategy, it chooses
- maximum LSN
- maximum delay
and waits for the resulting event.
For WAIT_FOR_ANY strategy - same, but it uses
minimal LSN/delay.
In other words, statements
(1) WAIT FOR ALL
LSN '7F97208' TIMEOUT 11,
LSN '3002808' TIMEOUT 50;
(2) WAIT FOR ANY
LSN '7F97208' TIMEOUT 11,
LSN '3002808' TIMEOUT 50;
are essentially equivalent to:
(1) WAIT FOR LSN '7F97208' TIMEOUT 50;
(2) WAIT FOR LSN '3002808' TIMEOUT 11;
It seems a bit counter-intuitive to me, because
I expected events to be treated independently.
Is this the expected behaviour?
================
In utility.c:
if (event->delay < time_val)
time_val = event->delay / 1000;
Since event->delay is an int, the result will
be zero for any delay value less than 1000.
I suggest either dividing by 1000.0 or
explicitly converting int to float.
Also, shouldn't event->delay be divided
by 1000 in the 'if' part as well?
================
You compare two LSN-s using pg_lsn_cmp():
res = DatumGetUInt32(
DirectFunctionCall2(pg_lsn_cmp,
lsn, trg_lsn));
As far as I understand, it'd be enough to use
operators such as "<=", as you do in wait.c:
/* If LSN has been replayed */
if (trg_lsn <= cur_lsn)
--
Anna Akenteva
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company
http://www.postgrespro.com
