[pgpool-hackers: 3827] Re: Proposal: language cleanup in Pgpool-II

[Tatsuo Ishii]

Hi Umar,

Patch committed.

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,
> 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
>> >> >>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>