On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 5:35 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:15 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> IMO there are inconsistencies in the second patch that was pushed.
>
> 1. In the am_xxx functions, why is there Assert 'in_use' only for the
> APPLY / PARALLEL_APPLY workers but not for TABLESYNC workers?
>
> 2. In the am_xxx functions there is now Assert 'in_use', so why are we
> still using macros to check again what we already asserted is not
> possible? (Or, if the checking overkill was a deliberate choice then
> why is there no isLeaderApplyWorker macro?)
>
> ~
>
> PSA a small patch to address these.
>
I find your suggestions reasonable. Alvaro, do you have any comments?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.