On Thursday, March 5, 2026 6:47 PM Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 5, 2026 at 9:35 AM shveta malik <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > 3) > > + /* Sleep for the configured interval */ > > + (void) WaitLatch(MyLatch, > > + WL_LATCH_SET | WL_TIMEOUT | WL_EXIT_ON_PM_DEATH, sleep_ms, > > + WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_SYNC_STATE_CHANGE); > > > > I don't think this wait-event is appropriate. Unlike tablesync, we are > > not waiting for any state change here. Shall we add a new one for our > > case? How about WAIT_EVENT_LOGICAL_SEQSYNC_MAIN? Thoughts? > > > > +1 for a new wait event. Few other minor comments:
Added. > > 1. > + * Check if the subscription includes sequences and start a > + sequencesync > + * worker if one is not already running. The active sequencesync worker > + will > + * handle all pending sequence synchronization. If any sequences remain > + * unsynchronized after it exits, a new worker can be started in the > + next > + * iteration. > * > - * Start a sequencesync worker if one is not already running. The active > - * sequencesync worker will handle all pending sequence synchronization. If > any > - * sequences remain unsynchronized after it exits, a new worker can be > started > - * in the next iteration. > > Why did this comment change? The earlier one sounds okay to me. I think either version is fine, so reverted this change now. > > 2. > break; > + > case COPYSEQ_INSUFFICIENT_PERM: > > Why does this patch add additional new lines? We use both styles (existing > and what this patch does) in the code but it seems unnecessary to change for > this patch. Removed. > > 3. > - ProcessSequencesForSync(); > + > + /* Check if sequence worker needs to be started */ > + MaybeLaunchSequenceSyncWorker(); > > No need for an additional line and a comment here. Removed. Here is the V11 patch which addressed all above comments and [1][2]. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uAfu-VPqCknLLvJ%2BPUx_cyoR-b70xUNT6Pyv8N-odKizQ%40mail.gmail.com [2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uBeAdz6-3P26Eryeq3TyjA-GiKY3z0hFMxzZD%3DAYGqQ3Q%40mail.gmail.com Best Regards, Hou zj
v11-0002-Synchronize-sequences-directly-in-REFRESH-SEQUEN.patch
Description: v11-0002-Synchronize-sequences-directly-in-REFRESH-SEQUEN.patch
v11-0001-Support-automatic-sequence-replication.patch
Description: v11-0001-Support-automatic-sequence-replication.patch
