Horton

Re: [Patch] pg_rewind: options to use restore_command from recovery.conf or command line

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Alexey Kondratov <a.kondratov@postgrespro.ru>, Liudmila Mantrova <l.mantrova@postgrespro.ru>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, vladimirlesk@yandex-team.ru, dsarafan@yandex-team.ru
Date: 2020-03-10T12:43:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Move frontend-side archive APIs from src/common/ to src/fe_utils/

  2. Add -c/--restore-target-wal to pg_rewind

  3. Move routine definitions of xlogarchive.c to a new header file

  4. Move routine building restore_command to src/common/

  5. Integrate recovery.conf into postgresql.conf

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 01:05:40PM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Two options seem reasonable to me in this case.  The first is to pass
> length as additional argument as you did.  The second option is to
> make argument a pointer to fixed-size array as following.
> 
> extern bool BuildRestoreCommand(const char *restoreCommand,
>                                 const char *xlogpath,   /* %p */
>                                 const char *xlogfname,  /* %f */
>                                 const char *lastRestartPointFname,  /* %r */
>                                 char (*commandResult)[MAXPGPATH]);
> 
> Passing pointer to array of different size would cause an error.  The
> downside of this approach is that passing palloc'd chunk of memory as
> commandResult would be less convenient.

Thanks Alexander for the input.  Another argument is that what you are
suggesting here is not the usual project style, so I would still stick
with two arguments to be consistent.
--
Michael