Hi, Xuneng
On Tue, 24 Mar 2026 at 19:17, Xuneng Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Zsolt, > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 1:55 PM Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello! > > This is a simple patch, but shouldn't it include at least some basic > tests verifying the new behavior? > > Thanks for looking into this. I've added a test for it. Please take a look. Thanks for updating the patch. A few comments on v2: 1. + (The probes listed next fire in sequence during checkpoint processing.) + arg0 is the number of buffers written. arg1 is the total number of These changes seem unnecessary. Additionally, there appears to be an indentation issue. 2. + current = pg_atomic_read_u64(&XLogCtl->walSegmentsCreated); + CheckpointStats.ckpt_segs_added = (int) + (current - XLogCtl->walSegsCreatedLastCheckpoint); + XLogCtl->walSegsCreatedLastCheckpoint = current; Is integer overflow a concern here? It seems unlikely in practice. > > -- > Best, > Xuneng > > [4. text/x-diff; > v2-0001-Count-WAL-segment-creations-by-all-processes-in-l.patch]... -- Regards, Japin Li ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co., Ltd.
