Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical repdepends on? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Petr Jelinek
Subject Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical repdepends on?
Date
Msg-id 12128647-857e-bd60-c962-8a75f2e5260a@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical repdepends on?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical repdepends on?
List pgsql-hackers
On 20/04/17 18:58, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 4/18/17 22:13, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> So my idea was to add some kind of inuse flag. This turned out to be bit
>> more complicated in terms of how to clean it than I would have hoped.
>> This is due to the fact that there is no way to reliably tell if worker
>> has failed to start if the parent worker crashed while waiting.
>>
>> My solution to that is to use similar logic to autovacuum where we use
>> timeout for worker to attach to shmem. We do this only if there is no
>> free slot found when launch of replication worker was requested.
> 
> It looks like launch_time is never set the current time in your patch.
> 

Oops, fixed.

-- 
  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and inheritance
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication - TRAP: FailedAssertion in pgstat.c