On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 12:47 PM Nisha Moond <nisha.moond...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 5:29 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 12. > > /* > > - * If the slot can be acquired, do so and mark it invalidated > > - * immediately. Otherwise we'll signal the owning process, below, and > > - * retry. > > + * If the slot can be acquired, do so and mark it as invalidated. If > > + * the slot is already ours, mark it as invalidated. Otherwise, we'll > > + * signal the owning process below and retry. > > */ > > - if (active_pid == 0) > > + if (active_pid == 0 || > > + (MyReplicationSlot == s && > > + active_pid == MyProcPid)) > > > > I wasn't sure how this change belongs to this patch, because the logic > > of the previous review comment said for the case of invalidation due > > to inactivity that active_id must be 0. e.g. Assert(s->active_pid == > > 0); > > > > I don't fully understand the purpose of this change yet. I'll look > into it further and get back. >
This change applies to all types of invalidation, not just inactive_timeout case, so moved the change to patch-001. It’s a general optimization for the case when the current process is the active PID for the slot. Also, the Assert(s->active_pid == 0); has been removed (in v50) as it was unnecessary. -- Thanks, Nisha
