On 2020/04/20 16:02, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 02:30:08PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> + * Block if we have unsent data. XXX For logical replication, let
>> + * WalSndWaitForWal(), handle any other blocking; idle receivers need
>> + * its additional actions. For physical replication, also block if
>> + * caught up; its send_data does not block.
>>
>> It might be better to s/WalSndWaitForWal()/send_data()? Because not only
>> WalSndWaitForWal() but also WalSndWriteData() seems to handle the blocking.
>> WalSndWriteData() is called also under send_data, i.e., XLogSendLogical().
>
> Thanks for reviewing. WalSndWriteData() blocks when we have unsent data,
> which is the same cause for blocking in WalSndLoop(). Since the comment you
> quote says we let WalSndWaitForWal() "handle any other blocking", I don't
> think your proposed change makes it more correct.
I was misreading this as something like "any other blocking than
the blocking in WalSndLoop()". Ok, I have no more comments on
the patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
