From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fix a comment in worker.c |
Date: | 2022-02-18 04:48:17 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JSzM3fhxCAQq=4K9W6xUiFvhq2cWos1X2d7WwU2gMUjg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:56 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 5:57 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > While reading the code, I realized that the second sentence of the
> > following comment in worker.c is not correct:
> >
> > /*
> > * Exit if the subscription was disabled. This normally should not happen
> > * as the worker gets killed during ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... DISABLE.
> > */
> > if (!newsub->enabled)
> > {
> > ereport(LOG,
> > (errmsg("logical replication apply worker for
> > subscription \"%s\" will "
> > "stop because the subscription was disabled",
> > MySubscription->name)));
> >
> > proc_exit(0);
> > }
> >
> > IIUC the apply worker normally exits here when the subscription is
> > disabled since we don't stop the apply worker during ALTER
> > SUBSCRIPTION DISABLE. I've attached a patch to remove it.
> >
>
> Yes, I also have the same understanding. Your patch LGTM. I'll push
> this unless someone thinks otherwise.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2022-02-18 05:22:52 | Re: Fix a comment in worker.c |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2022-02-18 04:27:09 | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |