From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Typo in tablesync comment |
Date: | 2021-02-02 13:53:37 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+qrSYDpNiJsH_rrD8e=3oLSyEBrfLe1H0oRqfeVCzQiw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 10:49 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:38:31AM +1100, Peter Smith wrote:
> > PSA a trivial patch to correct what seems like a typo in the tablesync comment.
>
> - * subscribed tables and their state. Some transient state during data
> - * synchronization is kept in shared memory. The states SYNCWAIT and
> + * subscribed tables and their state. Some transient states during data
> + * synchronization are kept in shared memory. The states SYNCWAIT and
>
> This stuff refers to SUBREL_STATE_* in pg_subscription_rel.h, and FWIW
> I find confusing the term "transient" in this context as a state may
> last for a rather long time, depending on the time it takes to
> synchronize the relation, no?
>
These in-memory states are used after the initial copy is done. So,
these are just for the time the tablesync worker is synced-up with
apply worker. In some cases, they could be for a longer period of time
when apply worker is quite ahead of tablesync worker then we will be
in the CATCHUP state for a long time but SYNCWAIT will still be for a
shorter period of time.
> I am wondering if we could do better
> here, say:
> "The state tracking the progress of the relation synchronization is
> additionally stored in shared memory, with SYNCWAIT and CATCHUP only
> appearing in memory."
>
I don't mind changing to your proposed text but I think the current
wording is also okay and seems clear to me.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-02-02 14:05:58 | Re: [PATCH] remove deprecated v8.2 containment operators |
Previous Message | iwata.aya@fujitsu.com | 2021-02-02 13:53:23 | RE: libpq debug log |