On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 3:19 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 1:46 PM shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com
> <shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for your patch.
> >
> > I saw that the patch added a check when selecting largest transaction, but in
> > addition to ReorderBufferCheckMemoryLimit(), the transaction can also be
> > streamed in ReorderBufferProcessPartialChange(). Should we add the check in
> > this function, too?
> >
> > diff --git a/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c b/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
> > index 9a58c4bfb9..108737b02f 100644
> > --- a/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
> > +++ b/src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
> > @@ -768,7 +768,8 @@ ReorderBufferProcessPartialChange(ReorderBuffer *rb, ReorderBufferTXN *txn,
> > */
> > if (ReorderBufferCanStartStreaming(rb) &&
> > !(rbtxn_has_partial_change(toptxn)) &&
> > - rbtxn_is_serialized(txn))
> > + rbtxn_is_serialized(txn) &&
> > + rbtxn_has_streamable_change(txn))
> > ReorderBufferStreamTXN(rb, toptxn);
> > }
>
> You are right we need this in ReorderBufferProcessPartialChange() as
> well. I will fix this in the next version.
Fixed this in the attached patch.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
