Re: Non-superuser subscription owners

On 11/16/21 15:06, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 11/3/21 15:50, Mark Dilger wrote:
>>> On Nov 1, 2021, at 10:58 AM, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> ALTER SUBSCRIPTION..[ENABLE | DISABLE] do not synchronously start or stop subscription workers.  The ALTER command
updatesthe catalog's subenabled field, but workers only lazily respond to that.  Disabling and enabling the
subscriptionas part of the OWNER TO would not reliably accomplish anything.
 
>> I have rethought my prior analysis.  The problem in the previous patch was that the subscription apply workers did
notcheck for a change in ownership the way they checked for other changes, instead only picking up the new ownership
informationwhen the worker restarted for some other reason.  This next patch set fixes that.  The application of a
changerecord may continue under the old ownership permissions when a concurrent command changes the ownership of the
subscription,but the worker will pick up the new permissions before applying the next record.  I think that is
consistentenough with reasonable expectations.
 
>>
>> The first two patches are virtually unchanged.  The third updates the behavior of the apply workers, and updates the
documentationto match.
 
>
> I'm generally happier about this than the previous patch set. With the
> exception of some slight documentation modifications I think it's
> basically committable. There doesn't seem to be a CF item for it but I'm
> inclined to commit it in a couple of days time.
>
>

Given there is some debate about the patch set I will hold off any
action for the time being.


cheers


andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com