Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys
Date
Msg-id d81ec92b53ce3d1b34896592611da6808dae44a5.camel@j-davis.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys  ("Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2023-04-04 at 11:42 +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> Done in V58 and now this is as simple as:


Minor comments on 0004 (address if you agree):

* Consider static inline for WalSndWakeupProcessRequests()?
* Is the WalSndWakeup() in KeepFileRestoredFromArchive() more like the
flush case? Why is the second argument unconditionally true? I don't
think the cascading logical walsenders have anything to do until the
WAL is actually applied.

Otherwise, looks good!

Regards,
    Jeff Davis




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Gregory Stark (as CFM)"
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove dead macro exec_subplan_get_plan
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: monitoring usage count distribution