On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 9:43 AM Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 9:26 AM Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 9:25 AM Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I was reading src/backend/replication/logical/applyparallelworker.c . >>> In `pa_allocate_worker`, when pa_launch_parallel_worker returns NULL, I >>> think the `ParallelApplyTxnHash` should be released. >>> >>> Please see the patch. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >> Here is the patch :-) >> > > In `pa_process_spooled_messages_if_required`, the `pa_unlock_stream` call > immediately follows `pa_lock_stream`. > I assume the following is the intended sequence of calls. If this is the > case, I can add it to the patch. > > Cheers > > diff --git a/src/backend/replication/logical/applyparallelworker.c > b/src/backend/replication/logical/applyparallelworker.c > index 2e5914d5d9..9879b3fff2 100644 > --- a/src/backend/replication/logical/applyparallelworker.c > +++ b/src/backend/replication/logical/applyparallelworker.c > @@ -684,9 +684,9 @@ pa_process_spooled_messages_if_required(void) > if (fileset_state == FS_SERIALIZE_IN_PROGRESS) > { > pa_lock_stream(MyParallelShared->xid, AccessShareLock); > - pa_unlock_stream(MyParallelShared->xid, AccessShareLock); > > fileset_state = pa_get_fileset_state(); > + pa_unlock_stream(MyParallelShared->xid, AccessShareLock); > } > > /* > Looking closer at the comment above this code and other part of the file, it seems the order is intentional.
Please disregard my email about `pa_process_spooled_messages_if_required`.