From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
cc: "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
        Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
        Melih Mutlu <m.melihmutlu@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>,
        "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
        "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: wake up logical workers after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
In-reply-to: <20230124171329.GA677220@nathanxps13>
References: 
 <CAA4eK1JFgvhxV448uNTkKpQpGe+X8WRWtyf45h4vASEpNz3Gkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230105171933.GB299579@nathanxps13>
 <CAA4eK1L-N9aUpoCXhoBCiEJAGw3cmKxaxn0Fo43ja+qzAGeyhQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230106054017.GA786807@nathanxps13> <3355444.1673044286@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20230107004525.GB789289@nathanxps13>
 <CAA4eK1+2VbK8BCrG7xFKJQKhYhYwWwkddAN2gL2coUQnTKLJ3g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230110174345.GA1292607@nathanxps13> <1353772.1674414774@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <OS0PR01MB5716860B1454C34E5B179B6694C99@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <20230124171329.GA677220@nathanxps13>
Comments: In-reply-to Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 24 Jan 2023 09:13:29 -0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2268132.1674584035.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 13:13:55 -0500
Message-ID: <2268133.1674584035@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2268133.1674584035%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> IMO ideally there should be a DSA_HANDLE_INVALID and DSHASH_HANDLE_INVALID
> for use with dsa_handle and dshash_table_handle, respectively.  But your
> patch does seem like an improvement.

Yeah, particularly given that dsa.h says

/*
 * The handle for a dsa_area is currently implemented as the dsm_handle
 * for the first DSM segment backing this dynamic storage area, but client
 * code shouldn't assume that is true.
 */
typedef dsm_handle dsa_handle;

but then provides no way for client code to not be aware that a
dsa_handle is a dsm_handle, if it needs to deal with "invalid" values.
Either that comment needs to be rewritten or we need to invent some
more macros.

I agree that the patch as given is an improvement on what was
committed, but I wonder whether we shouldn't work a little harder
on cleaning this up more widely.

			regards, tom lane