Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
Date
Msg-id 20230107004525.GB789289@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 05:31:26PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I've pushed 0001 and 0002, which seem pretty uncontroversial.

Thanks!

> Attached is a rebased 0003, just to keep the cfbot happy.
> I'm kind of wondering whether 0003 is worth the complexity TBH,
> but in any case I ran out of time to look at it closely today.

Yeah.  It's not as bad as I was expecting, but it does add a bit more
complexity than is probably warranted.  I'm not wedded to this approach.

BTW I intend to start a new thread for the bugs I mentioned upthread that
were revealed by setting wal_retrieve_retry_interval to 1ms in the tests.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrey Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: GROUP BY ALL
Next
From: "Imseih (AWS), Sami"
Date:
Subject: Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum