At Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:27:10 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 09:39:37AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > At Wed, 2 Mar 2022 18:18:10 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote in
> >> I don't think that's useful. Being in LogCheckpointStart
> >> (CreateCheckPoint or CreateRestartPoint) itself means that somebody
> >> has requested a checkpoint. Having CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED doesn't add
> >> any value.
> >
> > Agreed.
>
> Exactly my impression. This would apply now to the WAL shutdown code
> paths, and I'd suspect that the callers of CreateCheckPoint() are not
> going to increase soon. The point is: the logs already provide some
> contexts for any of those callers so I see no need for this additional
> information.
>
> > Actually no one does but RequestCheckpoint() accepts 0 as flags.
> > Checkpointer would be a bit more complex without CHECKPOINT_REQUESTED.
> > I don't think it does us any good to get rid of the flag value.
>
> I'd rather keep this code as-is.
I fail to identify the nuance of the phrase, so just for a
clarification. In short, I think we should keep the exiting code
as-is.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center