On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 3:25 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 7:17 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > PROBLEM:
> >
> > IMO, deducing the worker's type by examining multiple different field
> > values seems a dubious way to do it. This maybe was reasonable enough
> > when there were only 2 types, but as more get added it becomes
> > increasingly complicated.
>
> +1 for being more explicit in worker types.
>
+1. BTW, do we need the below functions (am_tablesync_worker(),
am_leader_apply_worker()) after this work?
static inline bool
am_tablesync_worker(void)
{
- return OidIsValid(MyLogicalRepWorker->relid);
+ return isTablesyncWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker);
}
static inline bool
am_leader_apply_worker(void)
{
- return (!am_tablesync_worker() &&
- !isParallelApplyWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker));
+ return isLeaderApplyWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker);
}
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
