On Thursday, April 25, 2024 4:59 PM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Currently the launcher's latch is used for the following: a) worker process > attach > b) worker process exit and c) subscription creation. > Since this same latch is used for multiple cases, the launcher process is not > able > to handle concurrent scenarios like: a) Launcher started a new apply worker > and > waiting for apply worker to attach and b) create subscription sub2 sending > launcher wake up signal. In this scenario, both of them will set latch of the > launcher process, the launcher process is not able to identify that both > operations have occurred 1) worker is attached 2) subscription is created and > apply worker should be started. As a result the apply worker does not get > started for the new subscription created immediately and gets started after > the > timeout of 180 seconds. > > I have started a new thread for this based on suggestions at [1]. > > a) Introduce a new latch to handle worker attach and exit.
I found the startup process also uses two latches(see recoveryWakeupLatch) for different purposes, so maybe this is OK. But note that both logical launcher and apply worker will call logicalrep_worker_launch(), if we only add one new latch, it means both workers will wait on the same new Latch, and the launcher may consume the SetLatch that should have been consumed by the apply worker(although it's rare). > b) Add a new GUC launcher_retry_time which gives more flexibility to users as > suggested by Amit at [1]. Before 5a3a953, the wal_retrieve_retry_interval > plays > a similar role as the suggested new GUC launcher_retry_time, e.g. even if a > worker is launched, the launcher only wait wal_retrieve_retry_interval time > before next round. IIUC, the issue does not happen frequently, and may not be noticeable where apply workers wouldn't be restarted often. So, I am slightly not sure if it's worth adding a new GUC. > c) Don't reset the latch at worker attach and allow launcher main to identify > and > handle it. For this there is a patch v6-0002 available at [2]. This seems simple. I found we are doing something similar in RegisterSyncRequest() and WalSummarizerMain(). Best Regards, Hou zj
