On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 06:08:41AM +0000, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 11:33:22AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > While testing table sync worker for logical replication I noticed that
> > if the table sync worker of logical replication failed to insert the
> > data for whatever reason, the table sync worker process exits with
> > error. And then the main apply worker launches the table sync worker
> > again soon without interval. This routine is executed at very high
> > frequency without interval.
> >
> > Should we do put a interval (wal_retrieve_interval or make a new GUC
> > parameter?) for launching the table sync worker?
>
> [Action required within three days. This is a generic notification.]
>
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Peter,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> v10 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within three calendar days of
> this message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may
> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
> well in advance of shipping v10. Consequently, I will appreciate your efforts
> toward speedy resolution. Thanks.
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com
This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com