Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
Date: 2023-01-06 05:00:18
Message-ID: CAA4eK1L-N9aUpoCXhoBCiEJAGw3cmKxaxn0Fo43ja+qzAGeyhQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 10:49 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:34:37AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 10:16 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> In v12, I moved the restart for two_phase mode to the end of
> >> process_syncing_tables_for_apply() so that we don't need to rely on another
> >> iteration of the loop.
> >
> > This should work but it is better to add a comment before calling
> > CommandCounterIncrement() to indicate that this is for making changes
> > to the relation state visible.
>
> Will do.
>

Isn't it better to move this part into a separate patch as this is
useful even without the main patch to improve wakeups?

> > Thinking along similar lines, won't apply worker need to be notified
> > of SUBREL_STATE_SYNCWAIT state change by the tablesync worker?
>
> wait_for_worker_state_change() should notify the apply worker in this case.
>

I think this is yet to be included in the patch, right?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2023-01-06 05:14:34 Re: Notify downstream to discard the streamed transaction which was aborted due to crash.
Previous Message jian he 2023-01-06 04:29:49 Re: Infinite Interval