Thread

Commits

  1. postgres_fdw: Fix comments in connection.c.

  2. Add support for asynchronous execution.

  1. postgres_fdw: Obsolete comments in GetConnection()

    Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> — 2021-10-06T09:06:13Z

    While working on something else, I noticed $SUBJECT, which I should
    have updated in commit 27e1f1456.  :-(  There are two places that need
    to be updated, but in the first place the second one seemed a bit
    redundant to me, because it says the same thing as the first one, and
    is placed pretty close to the first one within 10 lines or so.  So I
    rewrote the second one entirely into something much more simple like
    the attached.
    
    Best regards,
    Etsuro Fujita
    
  2. Re: postgres_fdw: Obsolete comments in GetConnection()

    Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> — 2021-10-06T09:36:56Z

    On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 2:35 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > While working on something else, I noticed $SUBJECT, which I should
    > have updated in commit 27e1f1456.  :-(  There are two places that need
    > to be updated, but in the first place the second one seemed a bit
    > redundant to me, because it says the same thing as the first one, and
    > is placed pretty close to the first one within 10 lines or so.  So I
    > rewrote the second one entirely into something much more simple like
    > the attached.
    
    +1 for rewording the comments. Here are my thoughts on the patch:
    
    1) Just to be consistent(we are using this word in the error message,
    and in other comments around there), how about
    + * Determine whether to try to reestablish the connection.
    instead of
    + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    
    2) Just to be consistent, how about
    + * cases where we're starting new transaction (not subtransaction),
    if a broken connection is
    instead of
    + * cases where we're out of all transactions, if a broken connection is
    
    3) IMO we don't need the word "later" here because we are immediately
    reestablishing the connection, if it is decided to do so.
    + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    The word "later" here in the comment below makes sense but not in the
    above comment.
    + * detected, we try to reestablish a new connection later.
    
    Regards,
    Bharath Rupireddy.
    
    
    
    
  3. Re: postgres_fdw: Obsolete comments in GetConnection()

    Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> — 2021-10-06T11:26:34Z

    Hi Bharath,
    
    On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 6:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy
    <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
    > +1 for rewording the comments. Here are my thoughts on the patch:
    >
    > 1) Just to be consistent(we are using this word in the error message,
    > and in other comments around there), how about
    > + * Determine whether to try to reestablish the connection.
    > instead of
    > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    
    Actually, we use the word “remake” as well in comments in
    connection.c: e.g., “If the connection needs to be *remade* due to
    invalidation, disconnect as soon as we're out of all transactions.” in
    GetConnection().  But I don’t have a strong opinion about that, so
    I’ll change the word as proposed.
    
    > 2) Just to be consistent, how about
    > + * cases where we're starting new transaction (not subtransaction),
    > if a broken connection is
    > instead of
    > + * cases where we're out of all transactions, if a broken connection is
    
    Actually, I modified the comment to match existing comments like the
    one mentioned above.  I think the patch would actually be more
    consistent.
    
    > 3) IMO we don't need the word "later" here because we are immediately
    > reestablishing the connection, if it is decided to do so.
    > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    
    Ok, I’ll drop the word “later”.
    
    Thanks!
    
    Best regards,
    Etsuro Fujita
    
    
    
    
  4. Re: postgres_fdw: Obsolete comments in GetConnection()

    Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> — 2021-10-06T11:38:56Z

    On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 4:55 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Hi Bharath,
    >
    > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 6:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy
    > <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > +1 for rewording the comments. Here are my thoughts on the patch:
    > >
    > > 1) Just to be consistent(we are using this word in the error message,
    > > and in other comments around there), how about
    > > + * Determine whether to try to reestablish the connection.
    > > instead of
    > > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    >
    > Actually, we use the word “remake” as well in comments in
    > connection.c: e.g., “If the connection needs to be *remade* due to
    > invalidation, disconnect as soon as we're out of all transactions.” in
    > GetConnection().  But I don’t have a strong opinion about that, so
    > I’ll change the word as proposed.
    
    Thanks.
    
    > > 2) Just to be consistent, how about
    > > + * cases where we're starting new transaction (not subtransaction),
    > > if a broken connection is
    > > instead of
    > > + * cases where we're out of all transactions, if a broken connection is
    >
    > Actually, I modified the comment to match existing comments like the
    > one mentioned above.  I think the patch would actually be more
    > consistent.
    
    Okay.
    
    > > 3) IMO we don't need the word "later" here because we are immediately
    > > reestablishing the connection, if it is decided to do so.
    > > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    >
    > Ok, I’ll drop the word “later”.
    
    Thanks.
    
    Regards,
    Bharath Rupireddy.
    
    
    
    
  5. Re: postgres_fdw: Obsolete comments in GetConnection()

    Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> — 2021-10-07T09:27:44Z

    On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 8:39 PM Bharath Rupireddy
    <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
    > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 4:55 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 6:37 PM Bharath Rupireddy
    > > <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > +1 for rewording the comments. Here are my thoughts on the patch:
    > > >
    > > > 1) Just to be consistent(we are using this word in the error message,
    > > > and in other comments around there), how about
    > > > + * Determine whether to try to reestablish the connection.
    > > > instead of
    > > > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    > >
    > > Actually, we use the word “remake” as well in comments in
    > > connection.c: e.g., “If the connection needs to be *remade* due to
    > > invalidation, disconnect as soon as we're out of all transactions.” in
    > > GetConnection().  But I don’t have a strong opinion about that, so
    > > I’ll change the word as proposed.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > > > 2) Just to be consistent, how about
    > > > + * cases where we're starting new transaction (not subtransaction),
    > > > if a broken connection is
    > > > instead of
    > > > + * cases where we're out of all transactions, if a broken connection is
    > >
    > > Actually, I modified the comment to match existing comments like the
    > > one mentioned above.  I think the patch would actually be more
    > > consistent.
    >
    > Okay.
    >
    > > > 3) IMO we don't need the word "later" here because we are immediately
    > > > reestablishing the connection, if it is decided to do so.
    > > > + * Determine whether to try to remake the connection later.
    > >
    > > Ok, I’ll drop the word “later”.
    >
    > Thanks.
    
    Pushed after modifying the patch as such.  Thanks for reviewing!
    
    Best regards,
    Etsuro Fujita