Hi, On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 6:04 PM Dilip Kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > > I merged v80-0001 and v80-0002 and adjusted the commit message and > test accordingly; I also included Amit's and Hou-san's code > refactoring. Rebased Nisha's V80_2-0003 on top of that as 0002, also > merged Shveta's datestyle fix with some modification into the 0002
Thanks for updating the patches. While reviewing the follow-up patch to error out the worker when it fails to acquire the CLT lock, I noticed that all the checks in the DDL and the apply worker are done without checking whether the two_phase option is enabled. Since the issue only exists when the subscription has prepared a transaction, I think we shall skip these checks when two_phase is disabled. In addition, the apply worker currently doesn't check whether a prepared transaction exists before reporting the ERROR, while we do check in the DDL path. To make it consistent, I think it would be better to check in the apply worker as well, this can further narrow down the scope of the ERROR. The change should be straightforward, and I think there won't be noticeable overhead: we'd only scan prepared transactions when lock acquisition conflicts, in which case the worker will either restart or wait on the lock anyway, so the scan is unnoticeable by comparison. Best Regards, Zhijie Hou
