On Tue, 2026-08-04 at 10:07 +0000, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> Thanks for updating the patch. While seeing 0001, I found that
> GetSubscription()
> and SubscriptionConninfo() are called without acquiring the lock for
> the
> subscription. Is there a possibility that DDL commands are executed
> concurrently
> and the cache can be invalidated in-between, thus it causes
> inconsistent results?
> I tested concurrent ALTER SUBSCRIPTION SET OWNER command in
> maybe_reread_subscription(),
> but the cache is not invalidated thus changing the owner is not
> reflected.
> Is it OK?
Can you explain in more detail the problem case? Is it unique to
server-based subscriptions?
Looking at the code it seems that invalidations can be missed if they
come between the time the catalogs are read and the time that
MySubscriptionValid is set. But I think that's a pre-existing issue --
perhaps we should start a new thread about that?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
