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: | 2022-02-16 11:26:53 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LZ7C555XSpBQVi3Md8OyAoveju1xVyq-NgJjFEFDzN0w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2022-02-16 11:36:18 | Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-02-16 11:20:54 | Re: Proposal for internal Numeric to Uint64 conversion function. |