MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAA4eK1KEYtgC3mB683iEq-CQUUSA8=3ZRYB9ZMbWHaU8hey2uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230824075044.cn4slf6wgvkpdc7f@alvherre.pgsql> <CAA4eK1JQEaHra+of4eQFyBFzONLhXNscT0miCVHeqgQp7+00AQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1JQEaHra+of4eQFyBFzONLhXNscT0miCVHeqgQp7+00AQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 15:45:17 +0530
Message-ID: <CAA4eK1Jg32htSrjKCAcrvFu+bztUNhdWem8RubuTwgABKjXGDg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: subscription/015_stream sometimes breaks
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, 
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1Jg32htSrjKCAcrvFu%2BbztUNhdWem8RubuTwgABKjXGDg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:48=E2=80=AFPM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 1:20=E2=80=AFPM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-=
ip.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 2023-Aug-24, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 1:31=E2=80=AFPM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh=
.no-ip.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > Hmm, I think if worker->in_use is false, we shouldn't consult the r=
est
> > > > of the struct at all, so I propose to add the attached 0001 as a mi=
nimal
> > > > fix.
> > >
> > > I think that way we may need to add the check for in_use before
> > > accessing each of the LogicalRepWorker struct fields or form some rul=
e
> > > about which fields (or places) are okay to access without checking
> > > in_use field.
> >
> > As far as I realize, we have that rule already.  It's only a few
> > relatively new places that have broken it.  I understand that the in_us=
e
> > concept comes from the one of the same name in ReplicationSlot, except
> > that it is not at all documented in worker_internal.h.
> >
> > So I propose we do both: apply Zhijie's patch and my 0001 now; and
> > somebody gets to document the locking design for LogicalRepWorker.
> >
>
> Agreed.
>

Pushed both the patches.

--=20
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.