| From: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: Logical Replication of sequences |
| Date: | 2025-10-24 03:25:49 |
| Message-ID: | TY4PR01MB169078C625FB8980E6F42F4F994F1A@TY4PR01MB16907.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thursday, October 23, 2025 2:15 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The attached patch has the changes for the same.
> I have also addressed the other comments: a) Shveta's comments at [1]
> b) Peter's comments at [2] & [3] c) Shveta's 2nd patch comments at [4] and d)
> Chao's comment#12 from [5] which was pending.
Thanks for updating the patch, I have a few comments for 0002.
1.
+ hash_seq_init(&hash_seq, sequences_to_copy);
+ while ((seq_entry = hash_seq_search(&hash_seq)) != NULL)
+ {
+ pfree(seq_entry->seqname);
+ pfree(seq_entry->nspname);
+ }
+ }
+
+ hash_destroy(sequences_to_copy);
I personally feel these memory free calls are unnecessary since the sync worker
will stop soon.
2.
-FinishSyncWorker(void)
+FinishSyncWorker(LogicalRepWorkerType wtype)
Can we directly access MyLogicalRepWorker->type instead of adding
one func parameter ?
3.
"ORDER BY s.schname, s.seqname\n",
Just to confirm, is this "ORDER BY" necessary for correctness ?
4.
elog(LOG, "skip synchronization of sequence \"%s.%s\" because it has been dropped concurrently",
nspname, seqname);
Shall we use ereport here ?
Best Regards,
Hou zj
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bryan Green | 2025-10-24 04:02:50 | Re: pg_ctl start may return 0 even if the postmaster has been already started on Windows |
| Previous Message | shveta malik | 2025-10-24 03:23:25 | Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart |