> >> I have improved the patch by making following changes: > >> > >> 1. Since stream_stop() was redundant, stream_stop() at the time of > WAL file closing was deleted. > >> > >> 2. Change the Flash judging timing for the readability of source code. > >> I have changed the Flash judging timing , from the continuous > message after receiving to > >> before the feedbackmassege decision of continue statement after > execution. > > > > Thanks for the updated version of the patch! > > > > While reviewing the patch, I found that HandleCopyStream() is still > > long and which decreases the readability of the source code. > > So I feel inclined to refactor the HandleCopyStream() more for better > > readability. What about the attached refactoring patch? > > Sorry, I forgot to attached the patch in previous email. So attached.
Advertising
Thank you for the refactoring patch. I did a review of the patch. - break; /* ignore the rest of this XLogData packet */ + return true; /* ignore the rest of this XLogData packet */ For break statement at close of wal file, it is a return to true. It may be a behavior of continue statement. Is it satisfactory? The walreceiver distributes XLogWalRcvProcessMsg and XLogWalRcvWrite, but isn't that division necessary? Regards, -- Furuya Osamu -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
