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

From Noah Misch
Subject Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical rep depends on?
Date
Msg-id 20170417020135.GA2988768@tornado.leadboat.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical rep depends on?  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] tablesync patch broke the assumption that logical repdepends on?
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 04:56:05AM +0000, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 02:28:44AM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >          src/backend/replication/logical/launcher.c
> >          * Worker started and attached to our shmem. This check is safe
> >          * because only launcher ever starts the workers, so nobody can steal
> >          * the worker slot.
> > 
> > The tablesync patch enabled even worker to start another worker.
> > So the above assumption is not valid for now.
> > 
> > This issue seems to cause the corner case where the launcher picks up
> > the same worker slot that previously-started worker has already picked
> > up to start another worker.
> 
> [Action required within three days.  This is a generic notification.]
> 
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item.  Peter,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> v10 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within three calendar days of
> this message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
> well in advance of shipping v10.  Consequently, I will appreciate your efforts
> toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.
> 
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com

This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update.  Kindly send
a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
update.  Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PANIC in pg_commit_ts slru after crashes
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] snapbuild woes