Re: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1KfDU_dPHs4SaLAEnd95EHTePv54TwOdDC0ayC0xOG4Hg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Adding a LogicalRepWorker type field
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 3:25 PM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 7:17 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > PROBLEM: > > > > IMO, deducing the worker's type by examining multiple different field > > values seems a dubious way to do it. This maybe was reasonable enough > > when there were only 2 types, but as more get added it becomes > > increasingly complicated. > > +1 for being more explicit in worker types. > +1. BTW, do we need the below functions (am_tablesync_worker(), am_leader_apply_worker()) after this work? static inline bool am_tablesync_worker(void) { - return OidIsValid(MyLogicalRepWorker->relid); + return isTablesyncWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker); } static inline bool am_leader_apply_worker(void) { - return (!am_tablesync_worker() && - !isParallelApplyWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker)); + return isLeaderApplyWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker); } -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: