MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8fab8-65d74c80-1-2f28e880@39088166> <CAA4eK1KOs3s6syZqUgrd2WvjTz64SGf0ToZcRoPMCKKH+M0YFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <99df2-65d8d200-1-63c26880@172687752> <CAA4eK1KtjjPxe5tjWeGNf5CfF9qfceVQCCC9XGsKzR-ifQD9uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ba4b6-65ddc580-9-5c3e3080@134362348> <CAA4eK1J6wOMkDDt3iOs+JqkvQvuwSORosTpqdejgvXqFmxex=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <badcf-65dde500-3-24ba3c80@28790566> <cedbe-65e0c000-1-6db17700@133269862>
 <a375c573-6c9b-4f0f-82c4-eb19cef2a4ca@iki.fi> <f9f1b-65e72c80-7-533dda00@76203995>
 <CAFPTHDbU4EkVmKL66i5BzrmQ6LFftQPx_TZ1euKt9fvVzQDyjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1+n7M2S1OpoGWDd+YZkDCuURMdVRbvP0eELQUvWgmDneg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDa=pJSZ_4dV5DPAOapRSgPcyyUTP0WzGY2Rz_D3-gwraw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1K1fSkeK=kc26G5cq87vQG4=1qs_b+no4+ep654SeBy1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <OSBPR01MB2552707A847936E6803CFAA5F5092@OSBPR01MB2552.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAA4eK1KY=uwXXuVMtuNTYHGFbbXgDveoFoP3UbxNXqxCAx8GBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <OSBPR01MB25528F4B0B8178D3AA8DE2BFF5082@OSBPR01MB2552.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAA4eK1KNrm8xE-ZOAS249m+DOk=YQ_YaoM-GsZEvC8rTMtdW8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDaz4cyRN3NbjYtkqCKFj7Dv1u0Z8wviY8fnJW4+0CkF_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDZNwMWfJZprw9jsoa4-19-h337KRY9Pt41PdNiQTTYaiQ@mail.gmail.com> <OSBPR01MB2552083E59F366B465DF0EF8F5122@OSBPR01MB2552.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <OSBPR01MB2552083E59F366B465DF0EF8F5122@OSBPR01MB2552.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 12:25:18 +0530
Message-ID: <CAA4eK1Jpj2Ebk2C_9meEDfZKen38cxpzOkxZ7818f1cfsT8=3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Slow catchup of 2PC (twophase) transactions on replica in LR
To: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>, 
	=?UTF-8?B?0JTQsNCy0YvQtNC+0LIg0JLQuNGC0LDQu9C40Lk=?= <v.davydov@postgrespro.ru>, 
	Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, 
	"pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1Jpj2Ebk2C_9meEDfZKen38cxpzOkxZ7818f1cfsT8%3D3w%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 2:26=E2=80=AFPM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
 ```
>
> It succeeds if force_alter is also expressly set. Prepared transactions w=
ill be
> aborted at that time.
>
> ```
> subscriber=3D# ALTER SUBSCRIPTION sub SET (two_phase =3D off, force_alter=
 =3D on);
> ALTER SUBSCRIPTION
>

Isn't it better to give a Notice when force_alter option leads to the
rollback of already prepared transactions?

I have another question on the latest 0001 patch:
+ /*
+ * Stop all the subscription workers, just in case.
+ * Workers may still survive even if the subscription is
+ * disabled.
+ */
+ logicalrep_workers_stop(subid);

In which case the workers will survive when the subscription is disabled?

--=20
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.