MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <OS3PR01MB6275982DA7BBA25DE88F6E839EF59@OS3PR01MB6275.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAD21AoDWs2Ru9Zc_jzjrA4k4JUtUDN2_9GktbuAzwHwdJY2myg@mail.gmail.com>
 <OS0PR01MB5716F30A9F73742BC8EA95A594FD9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAD21AoD7P9UU4nMgrotD_7LDbzpTpKugpwbjq5VUAbriqzVOSg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1JBT_ZKY5xSG_cwD7EOb26GrK2_CS1YPBgxE7rc69Y3jg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD21AoB4km=SgT0DAJOoKYicVNqvWZMtuQ7D9d0RFq20NK_EEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1JuhAuG-SzxCXi5YMhpKvGT_-boJT61e7Z14qfp6AwG6g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA4eK1JuhAuG-SzxCXi5YMhpKvGT_-boJT61e7Z14qfp6AwG6g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 10:53:47 +0900
Message-ID: 
 <CAD21AoAB_K2ZA_=Ja4COLM5-dJb2O_7nr1q1TmapSWSxdnh5KA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Logical replication timeout problem
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
	"wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com" <wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
 Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>,
	"kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
 Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>,
	Fabrice Chapuis <fabrice636861@gmail.com>,
 Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>,
	Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@enterprisedb.com>,
	"tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com" <tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoAB_K2ZA_%3DJa4COLM5-dJb2O_7nr1q1TmapSWSxdnh5KA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 7:18 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 8:07 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:32 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > So, shall we go back to the previous approach of using a separate
> > > function update_replication_progress?
> >
> > Ok, agreed.
> >
>
> Attached, please find the updated patch accordingly. Currently, I have
> prepared it for HEAD, if you don't see any problem with this, we can
> prepare the back-branch patches based on this.

Thank you for updating the patch. Looks good to me.

Regards,

-- 
Masahiko Sawada
EDB:  https://www.enterprisedb.com/