Horton

Re: [PATCH] Reuse Workers and Replication Slots during Logical Replication

Melih Mutlu <m.melihmutlu@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Melih Mutlu <m.melihmutlu@gmail.com>
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>, "Wei Wang (Fujitsu)" <wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com>, "Yu Shi (Fujitsu)" <shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-07-20T11:42:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Hi,

Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, 20 Tem 2023 Per, 05:41 tarihinde şunu
yazdı:

> 7. InitializeLogRepWorker
>
>   if (am_tablesync_worker())
>   ereport(LOG,
> - (errmsg("logical replication worker for subscription \"%s\", table
> \"%s\" has started",
> + (errmsg("logical replication worker for subscription \"%s\", table
> \"%s\" with relid %u has started",
>   MySubscription->name,
> - get_rel_name(MyLogicalRepWorker->relid))));
> + get_rel_name(MyLogicalRepWorker->relid),
> + MyLogicalRepWorker->relid)));
>
> But this is certainly a tablesync worker so the message here should
> say "logical replication table synchronization worker" like the HEAD
> code used to do.
>
> It seems this mistake was introduced in patch v20-0001.
>

I'm a bit confused here. Isn't it decided to use "logical replication
worker" regardless of the worker's type [1]. That's why I made this change.
If that's not the case here, I'll put it back.

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAHut%2BPt1xwATviPGjjtJy5L631SGf3qjV9XUCmxLu16cHamfgg%40mail.gmail.com

Thanks,
-- 
Melih Mutlu
Microsoft

Commits

  1. Refactor to split Apply and Tablesync Workers code.

  2. Fix possible logical replication crash.