Re: AlterSubscription_refresh "wrconn" wrong variable?
От | Peter Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: AlterSubscription_refresh "wrconn" wrong variable? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHut+PuuF4VbMCvfJMEL9ZE=3P9xuNV3dzS4dQP_uiK-JxARoA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: AlterSubscription_refresh "wrconn" wrong variable? (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 3:20 PM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 8:05 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> writes: > > > This patch replaces the global "wrconn" in AlterSubscription_refresh with a local variable of the same name, makingit consistent with other functions in subscriptioncmds.c (e.g. DropSubscription). > > > The global wrconn is only meant to be used for logical apply/tablesync worker. > > > Using the global/incorrect wrconn in AlterSubscription_refresh doesn't normally cause any problems, but harm is stillposslble if the apply worker ever manages to do a subscription refresh. e.g. see [1] > > > > Hm. I would actually place the blame for this on whoever thought > > it was okay to name a global variable something as generic as > > "wrconn". Let's rename that while we're at it, say to something > > like "tablesync_wrconn" (feel free to bikeshed). > OK, I am happy to change this but firstly just need some consensus on the new name to use. I hope to avoid changing it, and then changing it 5 more times. > I don't think "tablesync_wrconn" is the right name, because wrconn is > also being used in logical replication apply worker. So something like > "apply_worker_wrconn" would be more meaningful. > Yes. that is better except I wonder if "apply_worker_wrconn" might seem unusual when used by the tablesync worker. My suggestion is "lrep_worker_wrconn" which seems ok for both apply / tablesyn workers. ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: