On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 4:18 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 1:39 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 5:45 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > v4-0001 uses only 3 simple inline functions. Callers always pass > > parameters as Bharath had suggested. > > > > * > - Assert(am_leader_apply_worker()); > + Assert(is_leader_apply_worker(MyLogicalRepWorker)); > ... > - if (am_leader_apply_worker()) > + if (is_leader_apply_worker(MyLogicalRepWorker)) > > Passing everywhere MyLogicalRepWorker not only increased the code > change footprint but doesn't appear any better to me. Instead, let > am_parallel_apply_worker() keep calling > isParallelApplyWorker(MyLogicalRepWorker) as it is doing now. I feel > even if you or others feel that is a better idea, we can debate it > separately after the main patch is done because as far as I understand > that is not the core idea of this proposal.
Right, those changes were not really core. Reverted as suggested. PSA v5. > > * If you do the above then there won't be a need to change the > variable name is_parallel_apply_worker in logicalrep_worker_launch. > Done. ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
v5-0002-Switch-on-worker-type.patch
Description: Binary data
v5-0001-Add-LogicalRepWorkerType-enum.patch
Description: Binary data
