Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker?
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1Lu2Rp8uzCdgcD3-a_skTgspZxUODZE=m9qT0b+s9Qx=w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker?  (Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker?  (Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 8:37 AM Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 9:17 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 7.
> > +# check for occurrence of the expected error
> > +poll_output_until("replication slot \"$slotname\" already exists")
> > +    or die "no error stop for the pre-existing origin";
> >
> > In this test, isn't it better to check for datasync state like below?
> > 004_sync.pl has some other similar test.
> > my $started_query = "SELECT srsubstate = 'd' FROM pg_subscription_rel;";
> > $node_subscriber->poll_query_until('postgres', $started_query)
> >   or die "Timed out while waiting for subscriber to start sync";
> >
> > Is there a reason why we can't use the existing way to check for
> > failure in this case?
>
> Since the new design now uses temporary slots, is this test case still
> required?
>

I think so. But do you have any reason to believe that it won't be
required anymore?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: COPY FREEZE and setting PD_ALL_VISIBLE/visibility map bits
Next
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: Is Recovery actually paused?