On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 12:42:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> writes: >> My first thought is that the latter two uses should be moved to a new >> parameter, and the apply launcher should store the last start time for each >> apply worker like the apply workers do for the table-sync workers. In any >> case, it probably makes sense to lower this parameter's value for testing >> so that tests that restart these workers frequently aren't waiting for so >> long. > >> I can put a patch together if this seems like a reasonable direction to go. > > No, I'm still of the opinion that waiting for the launcher to timeout > before doing something is fundamentally wrong design. We should signal > it when we want it to do something. That's not different from what > you're fixing about the workers; why don't you see that it's appropriate > for the launcher too?
I'm reasonably certain the launcher is already signaled like you describe. It'll just wait to start new workers if it's been less than wal_retrieve_retry_interval milliseconds since the last time it started workers. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com