| From: | Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wake up backends immediately when sync standbys decrease |
| Date: | 2026-02-02 02:28:05 |
| Message-ID: | CABPTF7U2wMSu1WK0TObamyssN=8FqdDi2wHT8CDSX1X47P94Pg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Kato-san,
Thanks for working on this.
On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 2:25 PM Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the reviews!
>
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2026 at 12:28 AM Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > This issue can occur not only when the number of sync standbys is reduced,
> > but also when the configured standby names change. For example, if the config
> > changes from "FIRST 2 (sby1, sby2)" to "FIRST 2 (sby1, sby3)",
> > waiters on sby2 should be released immediately. But, currently, there can
> > a delay before that happens. Right?
>
> Yes, you're right, so I revised the comments and commit message.
>
> > > My main concern is code duplication. The same block is added in three places. While the existing reload handling is already duplicated there, adding more logic on top makes the situation a bit worse from a maintenance perspective.
> > >
> > > Would it make sense to factor the reload handling into a small helper, for example:
> >
> > +1
>
> I've updated it in the v2 patch.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Shinya Kato
> NTT OSS Center
v2 LGTM.
--
Best,
Xuneng
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Xuneng Zhou | 2026-02-02 02:37:43 | Re: Re: A out of date comment of WaitForWALToBecomeAvailable |
| Previous Message | Chao Li | 2026-02-02 02:26:28 | Re: relkind as an enum |