On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 5:35 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:15 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > IMO there are inconsistencies in the second patch that was pushed. > > 1. In the am_xxx functions, why is there Assert 'in_use' only for the > APPLY / PARALLEL_APPLY workers but not for TABLESYNC workers? > > 2. In the am_xxx functions there is now Assert 'in_use', so why are we > still using macros to check again what we already asserted is not > possible? (Or, if the checking overkill was a deliberate choice then > why is there no isLeaderApplyWorker macro?) > > ~ > > PSA a small patch to address these. >
I find your suggestions reasonable. Alvaro, do you have any comments? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
