From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Cc: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, "shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |
Date: | 2022-11-23 10:25:42 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+K1cYpSdGyES8sU9B1ANMr+rC13_7ZOnz-ZQ-CrRPmPQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 7:23 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> 07. proto.c - logicalrep_write_stream_abort()
>
> We may able to add assertions for abort_lsn and abort_time, like xid and subxid.
>
If you see logicalrep_write_stream_commit(), we have an assertion for
xid but not for LSN and other parameters. I think the current coding
in the patch is consistent with that.
>
> 08. guc_tables.c - ConfigureNamesInt
>
> ```
> &max_sync_workers_per_subscription,
> + 2, 0, MAX_PARALLEL_WORKER_LIMIT,
> + NULL, NULL, NULL
> + },
> ```
>
> The upper limit for max_sync_workers_per_subscription seems to be wrong, it should
> be used for max_parallel_apply_workers_per_subscription.
>
Right, I don't know why this needs to be changed in the first place.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2022-11-23 10:53:51 | Re: Fix for visibility check on 14.5 fails on tpcc with high concurrency |
Previous Message | Alex Fan | 2022-11-23 10:13:04 | Re: [PATCH] Enable using llvm jitlink as an alternative llvm jit linker of old Rtdyld. |