On 25/04/17 19:54, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I feel it's getting a bit late for reworkings of this extent, also
> considering the marginal nature of the problem we are trying to fix. My
> patch from April 18 is very localized and gets the job done.
>
> I think this is still a good direction to investigate, but if we have to
> extend the hash table API to get it done, this might not be the best time.
>
Yeah the hash API change needed is a bummer at this stage.
One thing I am missing in your patch however is cleanup of entries for
relations that finished sync. I wonder if it would be enough to just
destroy the hash when we get to empty list.
-- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
