On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 1:52 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 6:33 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 7:51 PM Masahiko Sawada > > <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- > > > When max_parallel_apply_workers_per_subscription is changed to a value > > > lower than the number of parallel worker running at that time, do we > > > need to stop extra workers? > > > > I think we can do this, like adding a check in the main loop of leader > > worker, and > > check every time after reloading the conf. OTOH, we will also stop the > > worker after > > finishing a transaction, so I am slightly not sure do we need to add > > another check logic here. > > But I am fine to add it if you think it would be better. > > > > I think this is tricky because it is possible that all active workers > are busy with long-running transactions, so, I think stopping them > doesn't make sense.
Right, we should not stop running parallel workers. > I think as long as we are freeing them after use > it seems okay to me. OTOH, each time after finishing the transaction, > we can stop the workers, if the workers in the free pool exceed > 'max_parallel_apply_workers_per_subscription'. Or the apply leader worker can check that after reloading the config file. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
