Re: Is WAL_DEBUG related code still relevant today?
Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-12-03T14:53:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v1-0001-Remove-WAL_DEBUG-related-code.patch (application/x-patch) patch v1-0001
On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 4:16 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes: > > On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 07:36:29PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > >> I started to think if this code is needed at all in production. How > >> about we do either of the following? > > > Well, the fact that this code is hidden behind an off-by-default macro > > seems like a pretty strong indicator that it is not intended for > > production. But that doesn't mean we should remove it. > > Agreed, production is not the question here. The question is whether > it's of any use to developers either. It looks to me that the code's > been broken since v13, if not before, which very strongly suggests > that nobody is using it. Think I'd vote for nuking it rather than > putting effort into fixing it. How about something like the attached? Please see the commit message for more detailed information. -- Bharath Rupireddy PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Commits
-
Remove trace_recovery_messages
- c7a3e6b46d38 17.0 landed
-
Fix compilation on Windows with WAL_DEBUG
- 7d5a740331bf 13.14 landed
- c49b6cab1e66 14.11 landed
- 87ed81a8739b 15.6 landed
- 6248a2bb92cc 16.2 landed
- 7636725b922c 17.0 landed