On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 12:36 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:07 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 6:14 PM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
> > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada
> <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:37 PM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
> > > > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > > I'm slightly concerned that there could be overhead of executing
> > > > GetLeaderApplyWorkerPid () for every backend process except for parallel
> > > > query workers. The number of such backends could be large and
> > > > GetLeaderApplyWorkerPid() acquires the lwlock. For example, does it
> make
> > > > sense to check (st_backendType == B_BG_WORKER) before calling
> > > > GetLeaderApplyWorkerPid()? Or it might not be a problem since it's
> > > > LogicalRepWorkerLock which is not likely to be contended.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the comment and I think your suggestion makes sense.
> > > I have added the check before getting the leader pid. Here is the new
> version patch.
> >
> > Thank you for updating the patch. Looks good to me.
> >
>
> Pushed.
Rebased and attach remaining patches for reviewing.
Regards,
Wang Wei
