On Thu, May 1, 2025 at 10:27 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> >
> > Additionally, shall we try to reproduce this case for parallel apply
> > workers?
>
> I noticed this issue while reading the code, so I haven't actually reproduced
> it.
> Are you saying it's not possible to reproduce this in practice?
On 2025/04/29 21:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 2:37 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
On 2025/04/26 3:03, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
I agree with these changes.
I think that while the changes for (2) should be for v19, the changes
for (1) might be treated as a bug fix?
Agreed. I've spli
On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 2:37 PM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> On 2025/04/26 3:03, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > I agree with these changes.
> >
> > I think that while the changes for (2) should be for v19, the changes
> > for (1) might be treated as a bug fix?
>
> Agreed. I've split the patch into two parts
On 2025/04/26 3:03, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
I agree with these changes.
I think that while the changes for (2) should be for v19, the changes
for (1) might be treated as a bug fix?
Agreed. I've split the patch into two parts:
0001 is for (1) and is a bug fix that should be back-patched to v1
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 9:10 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While reading the code of logicalrep_worker_launch(), I had two questions:
>
> (1)
> When the sync worker limit per subscription is reached,
> logicalrep_worker_launch()
> runs garbage collection to try to free up slots before ch
