Re: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field

From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field
Date: 2023-08-11 10:10:35
Message-ID: CAHut+Psp4wwaLXY8acWmHGRX8e+s3VvB+GRTFj3Wdj2U_akmdw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 7:33 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 7:50 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > * If you do the above then there won't be a need to change the
> > > variable name is_parallel_apply_worker in logicalrep_worker_launch.
> > >
> >
> > Done.
> >
>
> I don't think the addition of two new macros isTablesyncWorker() and
> isLeaderApplyWorker() adds much value, so removed those and ran
> pgindent. I am planning to commit this patch early next week unless
> you or others have any comments.
>

Thanks for considering this patch fit for pushing.

Actually, I recently found 2 more overlooked places in the launcher.c
code which can benefit from using the isTablesyncWorker(w) macro that
was removed in patch v6-0001.

I have posted another v7. (v7-0001 is identical to v6-0001). The
v7-0002 patch has the isTablesyncWorker changes. I think wherever
possible it is better to check the worker-type via macro instead of
deducing it by fields like 'relid', and patch v7-0002 makes the code
more consistent with other nearby isParallelApplyWorker checks in
launcher.c

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

Attachment Content-Type Size
v7-0002-Add-isTablesyncWorker.patch application/octet-stream 1.8 KB
v7-0001-Simplify-determining-logical-replication-worker-t.patch application/octet-stream 7.6 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2023-08-11 10:56:26 Re: [PATCH] Reuse Workers and Replication Slots during Logical Replication
Previous Message Juan José Santamaría Flecha 2023-08-11 09:48:18 Re: Inconsistent results with libc sorting on Windows