On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 7:50 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 8:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> >
> > I think it is only possible for the leader apply can worker to try to
> > receive the error message from an error queue after your 0002 patch.
> > Because another place already
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 8:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 9:14 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 3:17 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Attach another patch to fix the problem that pa_shutdown will access invalid
> > MyLogicalRepWorker.
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 3:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 11:08 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 12:52 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Monday, May 8, 2023 11:08 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 2,
On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 9:14 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 3:17 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
>
> Attach another patch to fix the problem that pa_shutdown will access invalid
> MyLogicalRepWorker. I personally want to avoid introducing new static
> variable,
> so I
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 11:08 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 12:52 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, May 8, 2023 11:08 AM Masahiko Sawada
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:22 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 28,
On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 12:52 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Monday, May 8, 2023 11:08 AM Masahiko Sawada
>
> Hi,
>
> >
> > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:22 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > While investigating
On Monday, May 8, 2023 11:08 AM Masahiko Sawada
Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:22 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > While investigating this issue, I've reviewed the code around
> > > callbacks and worker termination etc
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:22 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > While investigating this issue, I've reviewed the code around
> > callbacks and worker termination etc and I found a problem.
> >
> > A parallel apply worker calls the
On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 3:17 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:46 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:06 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Friday, April 28, 2023 2:18 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Alexander,
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:46 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:06 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, April 28, 2023 2:18 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Alexander, does the proposed patch fix the problem you are facing?
> > > > Sawada-San,
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:06 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Friday, April 28, 2023 2:18 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Alexander, does the proposed patch fix the problem you are facing?
> > > Sawada-San, and others, do you see any better way to fix it than what
> > > has been
On Friday, April 28, 2023 2:18 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:51 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > IIUC, that assert
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> While investigating this issue, I've reviewed the code around
> callbacks and worker termination etc and I found a problem.
>
> A parallel apply worker calls the before_shmem_exit callbacks in the
> following order:
>
> 1.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 6:01 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:51 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday, April
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:51 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > IIUC, that
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:51 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > IIUC, that assert will fail in case of any error raised between
> > >
Hello Amit and Zhijie,
28.04.2023 05:51, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
I think the problem is that it tried to release locks in
logicalrep_worker_onexit() before the initialization of the process is complete
because this callback function was
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin
> wrote:
> >
> > IIUC, that assert will fail in case of any error raised between
> > ApplyWorkerMain()->logicalrep_worker_attach()->before_shmem_exit() and
> >
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 4:11 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for reporting the issue.
>
> I think the problem is that it tried to release locks in
> logicalrep_worker_onexit() before the initialization of the process
On Wednesday, April 26, 2023 5:00 PM Alexander Lakhin
wrote:
> Please look at a new anomaly that can be observed starting from 216a7848.
>
> The following script:
> echo "CREATE SUBSCRIPTION testsub CONNECTION 'dbname=nodb'
> PUBLICATION testpub WITH (connect = false);
> ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
Hello hackers,
Please look at a new anomaly that can be observed starting from 216a7848.
The following script:
echo "CREATE SUBSCRIPTION testsub CONNECTION 'dbname=nodb' PUBLICATION testpub
WITH (connect = false);
ALTER SUBSCRIPTION testsub ENABLE;" | psql
sleep 1
rm
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 2:24 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 7:26 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > While looking at the worker.c, I realized that we have the following
> > code in handle_streamed_transaction():
> >
> > default:
> > Assert(false);
> >
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 7:26 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> While looking at the worker.c, I realized that we have the following
> code in handle_streamed_transaction():
>
> default:
> Assert(false);
> return false; / silence compiler warning /
>
> I think
At Mon, 24 Apr 2023 08:59:07 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote
in
> > Sorry for posting multiple times in a row, but I'm a bit unceratin
> > whether we should use FATAL or ERROR for this situation. The stream is
> > not provided by user, and the session or process cannot continue.
> >
>
> I think ERROR
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 8:40 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Mon, 24 Apr 2023 11:50:37 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote in
> > In my opinion, it is fine to replace the Assert with an ERROR.
>
> Sorry for posting multiple times in a row, but I'm a bit unceratin
> whether we should use
At Mon, 24 Apr 2023 11:50:37 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> In my opinion, it is fine to replace the Assert with an ERROR.
Sorry for posting multiple times in a row, but I'm a bit unceratin
whether we should use FATAL or ERROR for this situation. The stream is
not provided by user,
At Mon, 24 Apr 2023 11:50:37 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> I concur that returning false is problematic.
>
> For assertion builds, Assert typically provides more detailed
> information than elog. However, in this case, it wouldn't matter much
> since the worker would repeatedly
At Mon, 24 Apr 2023 10:55:44 +0900, Masahiko Sawada
wrote in
> While looking at the worker.c, I realized that we have the following
> code in handle_streamed_transaction():
>
> default:
> Assert(false);
> return false; / silence compiler warning /
>
> I
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 5:51 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2023 at 11:32 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, January 8, 2023 11:59 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > > Attach the updated patch set.
> >
> > Sorry, the commit message of 0001 was accidentally
LGTM. My only comment is about the commit message.
==
Commit message
d9d7fe6 reuse existing wait event when sending data in apply worker. But we
should have invent a new wait state if we are waiting at a new place, so fix
this.
~
SUGGESTION
d9d7fe6 made use of an existing wait event when
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 8:55 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 10:34 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > So names like the below seem correct format:
> > > >
> > > > a) WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_SEND_DATA
> > > > b) WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_LEADER_SEND_DATA
>
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 10:34 AM Amit Kapila
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 7:45 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:58 PM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 5:04 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:56
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 7:45 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:58 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 5:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:56 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > > >
> > > > My first impression was the
> > > >
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:58 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 5:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:56 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 1:32 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, February 7, 2023
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 5:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:56 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 1:32 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:17 AM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:56 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 1:32 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:17 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 3:43 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > while
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 1:32 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:17 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 3:43 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > while reading the code, I noticed that in pa_send_data() we set wait
> > > event to
On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:17 AM Amit Kapila
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 3:43 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > while reading the code, I noticed that in pa_send_data() we set wait
> > event to WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_PARALLEL_APPLY_STATE_CHANGE while
> sending
> > the message
On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 15:37 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:41 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > We need to think of a predictable
> > > way to test this path which may not be difficult. But I guess it would
> > > be
On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:41 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > We need to think of a predictable
> > way to test this path which may not be difficult. But I guess it would
> > be better to wait for some feedback from the field about this
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 1:28 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 12:29 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Friday, February 3, 2023 11:04 AM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023
On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 3:43 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> while reading the code, I noticed that in pa_send_data() we set wait event
> to WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_PARALLEL_APPLY_STATE_CHANGE while sending the
> message to the queue. Because this state is used in multiple places, user
> might
>
Dear Hou,
> I think PARALLEL_APPLY_MAIN waits for two kinds of event: 1) wait for new
> message from the queue 2) wait for the partial file state to be set. So, I
> think introducing a new general event for them is better and it is also
> consistent with the WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_APPLY_MAIN which is
On Monday, February 6, 2023 6:34 PM Kuroda, Hayato
wrote:
> > while reading the code, I noticed that in pa_send_data() we set wait
> > event to WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_PARALLEL_APPLY_STATE_CHANGE while
> sending
> > the message to the queue. Because this state is used in multiple
> > places, user
Dear Hou,
> while reading the code, I noticed that in pa_send_data() we set wait event
> to WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_PARALLEL_APPLY_STATE_CHANGE while sending
> the
> message to the queue. Because this state is used in multiple places, user
> might
> not be able to distinguish what they are waiting
Hi,
while reading the code, I noticed that in pa_send_data() we set wait event
to WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_PARALLEL_APPLY_STATE_CHANGE while sending the
message to the queue. Because this state is used in multiple places, user might
not be able to distinguish what they are waiting for. So It seems
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 1:28 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 12:29 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, February 3, 2023 11:04 AM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 4:52 AM Peter Smith
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Some minor review
On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 12:29 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Friday, February 3, 2023 11:04 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 4:52 AM Peter Smith
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Some minor review comments for v91-0001
> > >
> >
> > Pushed this yesterday after addressing
On Friday, February 3, 2023 11:04 AM Amit Kapila
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 4:52 AM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > Some minor review comments for v91-0001
> >
>
> Pushed this yesterday after addressing your comments!
Thanks for pushing.
Currently, we have two remaining patches which we
On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 4:52 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Some minor review comments for v91-0001
>
Pushed this yesterday after addressing your comments!
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
Some minor review comments for v91-0001
==
doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
1.
-Allows streaming or serializing changes immediately in
logical decoding.
-The allowed values of logical_replication_mode are
-buffered and immediate. When set
-to immediate,
On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 9:04 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> I think your comment makes sense, thanks.
> I updated the patch for the same.
>
The patch looks mostly good to me. I have made a few changes in the
comments and docs, see attached.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
Thanks for the updates to address all of my previous review comments.
Patch v90-0001 LGTM.
--
Kind Reagrds,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 8:23 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:23 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, January 30, 2023 12:13 PM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
> >
> > Thanks for your comments.
> >
> > >
> > >
On Monday, January 30, 2023 10:20 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
>
> I have one comment on v89 patch:
>
> + /*
> +* Using 'immediate' mode returns false to cause a switch to
> +* PARTIAL_SERIALIZE mode so that the remaining changes will
> be serialized.
> +*/
> +
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:23 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Monday, January 30, 2023 12:13 PM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> >
> > ==
> > General
> >
> > 1.
> > The test cases are checking the log content but
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 3:23 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Monday, January 30, 2023 12:13 PM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> >
> > ==
> > General
> >
> > 1.
> > The test cases are checking the log content but
Dear Hou,
Thank you for updating the patch!
I checked your replies and new patch, and it seems good.
Currently I have no comments
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 11:37 AM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人
wrote:
>
> Followings are comments.
Thanks for the comments.
> In this test the rollback-prepared seems not to be executed. This is because
> serializations are finished while handling PREPARE message and the final
> state of
On Monday, January 30, 2023 12:13 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
Thanks for your comments.
>
> ==
> General
>
> 1.
> The test cases are checking the log content but they are not checking for
> debug logs or untranslated elogs -- they are expecting a
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:40 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Patch v88-0001 LGTM.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
Here are my review comments for v88-0002.
==
General
1.
The test cases are checking the log content but they are not checking
for debug logs or untranslated elogs -- they are expecting a normal
ereport LOG that might be translated. I’m not sure if that is OK, or
if it is a potential problem.
Patch v88-0001 LGTM.
Below are just some minor review comments about the commit message.
==
Commit message
1.
We have discussed having this parameter as a subscription option but
exposing a parameter that is primarily used for testing/debugging to users
didn't seem advisable and there is no
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 3:27 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:05 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 3:15 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > 1.
> > > @@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ int logical_decoding_work_mem;
> > > static const Size max_changes_in_memory = 4096; /*
Dear Hou,
Thank you for updating the patch! Followings are comments.
1. config.sgml
```
+the changes till logical_decoding_work_mem is reached. It can also be
```
I think it should be sandwiched by .
2. config.sgml
```
+On the publisher side, logical_replication_mode
allows
On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 7:30 AM Peter Smith
wrote:
>
> Here are my review comments for patch v87-0002.
Thanks for your comments.
> ==
> doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
>
> 1.
>
> -Allows streaming or serializing changes immediately in
> logical decoding.
> The
Dear Amit,
>
> I have updated the patch accordingly and it looks good to me. I'll
> push this first patch early next week (Monday) unless there are more
> comments.
Thanks for updating. I checked v88-0001 and I have no objection. LGTM.
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:05 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 3:15 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > 1.
> > @@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ int logical_decoding_work_mem;
> > static const Size max_changes_in_memory = 4096; /* XXX for restore only */
> >
> > /* GUC variable */
> > -int
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 3:15 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> 1.
> @@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ int logical_decoding_work_mem;
> static const Size max_changes_in_memory = 4096; /* XXX for restore only */
>
> /* GUC variable */
> -int logical_decoding_mode = LOGICAL_DECODING_MODE_BUFFERED;
> +int
Here are my review comments for patch v87-0002.
==
doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
1.
-Allows streaming or serializing changes immediately in
logical decoding.
The allowed values of logical_replication_mode are
-buffered and immediate. When set
-to
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 11:49 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
...
>
> Sorry, the patch set was somehow attached twice. Here is the correct new
> version
> patch set which addressed all comments so far.
>
Here are my review comments for patch v87-0001.
==
Dear Hou,
> Sorry, the patch set was somehow attached twice. Here is the correct new
> version
> patch set which addressed all comments so far.
Thank you for updating the patch! I confirmed that
All of my comments are addressed.
One comment:
In this test the rollback-prepared seems not to be
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:47 PM Hou, Zhijie wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 3:19 PM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > Here are some review comments for v86-0002
> >
Sorry, the patch set was somehow attached twice. Here is the correct new version
patch set which addressed all comments so
On Monday, January 23, 2023 8:34 PM Kuroda, Hayato wrote:
>
> Followings are my comments.
Thanks for your comments.
>
> 1. guc_tables.c
>
> ```
> static const struct config_enum_entry logical_decoding_mode_options[] = {
> - {"buffered", LOGICAL_DECODING_MODE_BUFFERED, false},
> -
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:43 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Here are my review comments for patch v86-0001.
Thanks for your comments.
>
>
> ==
> Commit message
>
> 2.
> Since we may extend the developer option logical_decoding_mode to to test the
> parallel apply of large transaction
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 3:19 PM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Here are some review comments for v86-0002
>
> ==
> Commit message
>
> 1.
> Use the use the existing developer option logical_replication_mode to test the
> parallel apply of large transaction on subscriber.
>
> ~
>
> Typo “Use
Here are some review comments for v86-0002
==
Commit message
1.
Use the use the existing developer option logical_replication_mode to test the
parallel apply of large transaction on subscriber.
~
Typo “Use the use the”
SUGGESTION (rewritten)
Give additional functionality to the existing
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 9:13 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> 1.
>
> IIUC the GUC name was made generic 'logical_replication_mode' so that
> multiple developer GUCs are not needed later.
>
> But IMO those current option values (buffered/immediate) for that GUC
> are maybe a bit too generic. Perhaps in
Here are my review comments for patch v86-0001.
==
General
1.
IIUC the GUC name was made generic 'logical_replication_mode' so that
multiple developer GUCs are not needed later.
But IMO those current option values (buffered/immediate) for that GUC
are maybe a bit too generic. Perhaps in
Dear Hou,
Thank you for updating the patch! Followings are my comments.
1. guc_tables.c
```
static const struct config_enum_entry logical_decoding_mode_options[] = {
- {"buffered", LOGICAL_DECODING_MODE_BUFFERED, false},
- {"immediate", LOGICAL_DECODING_MODE_IMMEDIATE, false},
+
On Monday, January 23, 2023 11:17 AM Amit Kapila
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Yet another way is to use the existing parameter logical_decode_mode
> > > [1]. If the value of logical_decoding_mode is 'immediate', then we
> > > can
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 8:47 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Yet another way is to use the existing parameter logical_decode_mode
> > > [1]. If the value of logical_decoding_mode is 'immediate', then we can
> > > immediately
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 11:48 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> >
> > Yet another way is to use the existing parameter logical_decode_mode
> > [1]. If the value of logical_decoding_mode is 'immediate', then we can
> > immediately switch to partial serialize mode. This will eliminate the
> >
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 2:41 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 12:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 11:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > Here are some review comments for patch v79-0002.
> > >
> >
> > So, this is about the latest
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 3:44 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:11 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 12:09 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 11:50 AM Peter Smith
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Here are some review comments for
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:11 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 12:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 11:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > Here are some review comments for patch v79-0002.
> > >
> >
> > So, this is about the latest
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 12:09 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 11:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > Here are some review comments for patch v79-0002.
> >
>
> So, this is about the latest v84-0001-Stop-extra-worker-if-GUC-was-changed.
>
> >
> > I feel this patch just adds more
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 11:50 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> Here are some review comments for patch v79-0002.
>
So, this is about the latest v84-0001-Stop-extra-worker-if-GUC-was-changed.
> ==
>
> General
>
> 1.
>
> I saw that earlier in this thread Hou-san [1] and Amit [2] also seemed
> to say
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 12:36 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:07 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 6:14 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:07 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 6:14 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:37 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> > > I'm
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 6:14 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:37 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > > Attach the new version 0001 patch which addressed all other comments.
> > >
> >
> >
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 12:34 PM shveta malik
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 9:07 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:32 AM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> > > OK. I didn't know there was another header convention that you were
> > > following.
> > > In
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:37 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> > Attach the new version 0001 patch which addressed all other comments.
> >
>
> Thank you for updating the patch. Here is one comment:
>
> @@ -426,14 +427,24 @@
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:37 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:32 AM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:21 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:43 AM Peter Smith
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 12:55 PM Amit Kapila
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:59 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:35 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 3:19 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Okay, I have added the comments in
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:59 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:35 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 3:19 PM Amit Kapila
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Okay, I have added the comments in
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:59 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:35 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 3:19 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > Okay, I have added the comments in get_transaction_apply_action() and
> > > updated the comments to refer to the
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 9:07 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:32 AM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:21 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:43 AM Peter Smith
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 2:37 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:32 AM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:21 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:43 AM Peter Smith
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:32 AM Peter Smith wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 1:21 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:43 AM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 5:41 PM Amit Kapila
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan
1 - 100 of 488 matches
Mail list logo
