Re: [HACKERS] Interval for launching the table sync worker

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:42 AM, Petr Jelinek
<petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 24/04/17 17:52, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
>> <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>> + /*
>> + * Remove entries no longer necessary. The flag signals nothing if
>> + * subrel_local_state is not updated above. We can remove entries in
>> + * frozen hash safely.
>> + */
>> + if (local_state_updated && !wstate->alive)
>> + {
>> + hash_search(subrel_local_state, &wstate->rs.relid,
>> + HASH_REMOVE, NULL);
>> + continue;
>> + }
>>
>> IIUC since the apply worker can change the status from
>> SUBREL_STATE_SYNCWAIT to SUBREL_STATE_READY in a hash_seq_search loop
>> the table sync worker which is changed to SUBREL_STATE_READY by the
>> apply worker before updating the subrel_local_state could be remained
>> in the hash table. I think that we should scan pg_subscription_rel by
>> using only a condition "subid".
>>
>
> I don't follow this.
>

Hmm, I'd misunderstood something. It should work fine. Sorry for the noise.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center