[pgpool-hackers: 3826] Re: Proposal: language cleanup in Pgpool-II
Umar Hayat
m.umarkiani at gmail.com
Wed Sep 23 16:33:33 JST 2020
Hi Ishii,
Please find another patch to fix a few more places.
Regards
Umar Hayat
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 3:07 PM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi Umar,
>
> I have applied your patches along with Japanese doc update.
> Thank you!
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
>
> > Hi Ishii,
> > Due to a recent commit, v2-005 failed in runtime.sgml file (and
> subsequent
> > patches failed). Please find the attached v3-005 patch ( you can use
> other
> > 6 patches from v2 ).
> >
> > Regards
> > Umar Hayat
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 3:08 AM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Umar,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the new version of patches. However when I git apply
> >> each patches against current master, some of them do not apply. Can
> >> you please rebase them?
> >>
> >> ../language_fixes/v2-005-master-slave-to-native-replication.diff
> >> error: patch failed: doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml:187
> >> error: doc/src/sgml/runtime.sgml: patch does not apply
> >> ../language_fixes/v2-006-masterslave-to-mainreplica.diff
> >> error: patch failed: doc/src/sgml/loadbalance.sgml:27
> >> error: doc/src/sgml/loadbalance.sgml: patch does not apply
> >> error: patch failed: src/protocol/pool_process_query.c:3281
> >> error: src/protocol/pool_process_query.c: patch does not apply
> >> error: patch failed: src/protocol/pool_proto_modules.c:228
> >> error: src/protocol/pool_proto_modules.c: patch does not apply
> >> ../language_fixes/v2-007-follow_master-and-recovery-and-misc.diff
> >> error: patch failed: doc.ja/src/sgml/failover.sgml:621
> >> error: doc.ja/src/sgml/failover.sgml: patch does not apply
> >> error: patch failed: doc/src/sgml/failover.sgml:475
> >> error: doc/src/sgml/failover.sgml: patch does not apply
> >> error: patch failed: doc/src/sgml/restrictions.sgml:127
> >> error: doc/src/sgml/restrictions.sgml: patch does not apply
> >> error: patch failed: src/main/pgpool_main.c:1596
> >> error: src/main/pgpool_main.c: patch does not apply
> >> error: patch failed: src/protocol/pool_process_query.c:83
> >> error: src/protocol/pool_process_query.c: patch does not apply
> >>
> >> > Hi Team,
> >> > Please find second version patches attached with updates suggested.
> Feel
> >> > free to comment if more improvements are needed.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > Umar Hayat
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:42 PM Umar Hayat <m.umarkiani at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:28 PM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii at sraoss.co.jp>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hi Umar,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> Replacing to red and green is a little bit confusing to me. What
> >> >>> >> about denylist/allowlist? It's suggested by Linux.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Yes, I read few Linux related articles and few other sources
> >> >>> > too. denylist/allowlist is used for decision where we either
> allow or
> >> >>> deny.
> >> >>> > In our case, based on mutability factor we decide whether we
> should
> >> send
> >> >>> > query to primary or standby. So in-fact we are not blocking
> queries.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That makes sense.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > IMO we can use
> >> >>> > 1. deny/allow ( e.g allow_function_list, deny_function_list,
> >> >>> > allow_query_pattern, allow_memqcache_table_list,
> >> >>> deny_memqcache_table_list)
> >> >>> > ?
> >> >>> > 2. or descriptive term like mutable/immutable & safe/unsafe based
> on
> >> >>> pgpool
> >> >>> > usage ( e.g. mutable_function_list, immutable_function_list,
> >> >>> > safe_query_pattern, safe_memqcache_table_list,
> >> >>> unsafe_memqcache_table_list
> >> >>> > ) ?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I like 2. What about:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> black/white_function_list -> write_function_list,
> >> read_only_function_list
> >> >>> black_query_pattern -> primay_routing_query_pattern
> >> >>> black/white_memqcache_table_list ->
> cache_unsafe/cache_safe_table_list
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sounds good. I will send updated the patch with these terms.
> >> >>
> >> >>> >> v1-002-Watchdog-master-leader
> >> >>> >> > Replace master to 'leader' for 'master' watchdog nodes
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Sounds reasonable choice to me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > v1-003-ALWAYS_MASTER-to-ALWAYS_PRIMARY
> >> >>> >> > Replace backend_flagx option 'ALWAYS_MASTER' with
> >> 'ALWAYS_PRIMARY'
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Sounds good to me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > v1-004-relcache_query_target--master-to-primary
> >> >>> >> > Replace relcache_query_target option 'master' to 'primary'
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Sounds good to me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > v1-005-master-slave-to-primarystandby
> >> >>> >> > Replace Master/Slave with Primary/Secondary
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I think we could replace "Master/Slave mode" to "Native
> replication
> >> >>> >> mode".
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Using "Primary" as the replacemnet for "Master" sounds is
> confusing
> >> as
> >> >>> >> there's "Primary" in the streaming replication mode.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I will use Native Replication mode in next patch.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> > v1-006-masterslave-to-mainreplica
> >> >>> >> > Replace Master Node with Main node ( node id with 0 or
> youngest
> >> >>> live )
> >> >>> >> > Couldn't translate with primary/leader as they were already
> >> used
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> >> > different context
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Sounds good to me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > v1-007-follow_master-and-recovery-and-misc
> >> >>> >> > Replace follow_master with follow_primary with parameters
> >> replaced
> >> >>> >> with
> >> >>> >> > new/old master with new/old main.
> >> >>> >> > Replace some remaining occurrences of master with
> >> >>> primary/main/leader
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Sounds good to me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > In the above patches I didn't change older releases notes (
> except
> >> >>> for
> >> >>> >> some
> >> >>> >> > links so they don't break and point to new terminology),
> history,
> >> >>> TODO
> >> >>> >> and
> >> >>> >> > Japanese Doc string.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Sounds good to me. (I will take care of Japanese Doc string).
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > Postmaster ( It's used around 150 times ) and very few other
> >> >>> occurrences
> >> >>> >> of
> >> >>> >> > 'master' are still present.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> No objection from me.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > There are alot of inter-dependent terminologies and so I might
> >> have
> >> >>> >> missed
> >> >>> >> > something. Looking at them as a whole makes some sense,
> changing
> >> one
> >> >>> term
> >> >>> >> > might lead to inconsistency in some other areas.
> >> >>> >> > I tried to come up with the above terminologies, just to start
> >> >>> >> > conversation. Feel free to share feedback and comments.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Thanks.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > Regards
> >> >>> >> > Umar Hayat
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 8:03 AM Umar Hayat <
> m.umarkiani at gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> Hi Tatsuou Ishii,
> >> >>> >> >> Yes I'm planning for 4.2 and work is in progress, I will send
> >> >>> patches in
> >> >>> >> >> the upcoming week.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Regards
> >> >>> >> >> Umar Hayat
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 5:59 AM Tatsuo Ishii <
> ishii at sraoss.co.jp>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> Hi Umar,
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> Now that we are getting closer to release Pgpool-II 4.2, I
> would
> >> >>> like
> >> >>> >> >>> to know if you wish to bring your work into 4.2 or not. If
> you
> >> >>> wish,
> >> >>> >> >>> can you please tell us the time line for the patch?
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 4:33 PM Tatsuo Ishii <
> >> ishii at sraoss.co.jp
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > Hi Hackers,
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > Recently PG community did a language clean up ( to make
> it
> >> >>> more
> >> >>> >> >>> >> inclusive )
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > for Server, including docs and code (see here
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > <
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20200615182235.x7lch5n6kcjq4aue@alap3.anarazel.de
> >> >>> >> >>> >> >).
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > Most changes were related to renaming "slave" and
> "master"
> >> >>> >> >>> terminologies.
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > Do we have any plans to make such changes to make pgpool
> >> >>> >> consistent
> >> >>> >> >>> with
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > Server as well as in general Pgpool specific things ?
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > If we do have a plan, it would need multiple patches as
> it
> >> >>> would
> >> >>> >> >>> affect
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > docs, code and configuration and samples.
> >> >>> >> >>> >> > Let me know suggestions and thoughts and I can work on
> >> this.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >> It seems the discussion is still on going? I mean it has
> not
> >> >>> been
> >> >>> >> >>> >> committed yet?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20200615182235.x7lch5n6kcjq4aue%40alap3.anarazel.de
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >> Discussion is going on for two pending point which are not
> >> part
> >> >>> of
> >> >>> >> >>> patches
> >> >>> >> >>> > ( postmaster & master branch) and one WIP
> patch(multi-master),
> >> >>> rest
> >> >>> >> of
> >> >>> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >>> > 7 patches for that thread are committed.
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=229f8c219f8fffacc253eca6023eab10a16eb009
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=5e7bbb528638c0f6d585bab107ec7a19e3a39deb
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=e07633646a22734e85d7fc58a66855f747128e6b
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=9e101cf60612f4be4f855d7393531900c2986a55
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=09dfd430118f1fadf52a782db5ee161b1eb16337
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=7c89f8a5b810d10dae300ec58ea7d70024e9123e
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=a9a4a7ad565b136cbee735d4bb505d98d06da522
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> >> The topic has not been discussed yet in pgpool-hackers,
> but I
> >> >>> >> >>> >> personally think we need to do something soon or later
> >> anyway.
> >> >>> My
> >> >>> >> >>> >> concern is that that might require user-visible changes
> like:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >> master
> >> >>> >> >>> >> slave
> >> >>> >> >>> >> white_function_list
> >> >>> >> >>> >> black_function_list
> >> >>> >> >>> >> black_query_pattern_list
> >> >>> >> >>> >> white_memqcache_table_list
> >> >>> >> >>> >> black_memqcache_table_list
> >> >>> >> >>> >> follow_master_command
> >> >>> >> >>> >> relcache_query_target = master
> >> >>> >> >>> >> [maybe more...]
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >> Is it possible for you to come with a proposal for this so
> >> that
> >> >>> >> pgpool
> >> >>> >> >>> >> hackers could start discussion?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >> Best regards,
> >> >>> >> >>> >> --
> >> >>> >> >>> >> Tatsuo Ishii
> >> >>> >> >>> >> SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> >> >>> >> >>> >> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
> >> >>> >> >>> >> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> > Sure, I will create proposal for different sections and
> >> patches
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> >> >>> discuss
> >> >>> >> >>> > it further.
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> > Thanks
> >> >>> >> >>> > Umar Hayat
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.sraoss.jp/pipermail/pgpool-hackers/attachments/20200923/847cebea/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: v3-008-misc-master-clean.diff
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 9244 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.sraoss.jp/pipermail/pgpool-hackers/attachments/20200923/847cebea/attachment-0001.obj>
More information about the pgpool-hackers
mailing list