On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:30 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I think that either of the options you suggested now would be better.
>>>>> We'll need that for stopping the tablesync which is in progress during
>>>>> DropSubscription as well as those will currently still keep running. I
>>>>> guess we could simply just register syscache callback, the only problem
>>>>> with that is we'd need to AcceptInvalidationMessages regularly while we
>>>>> do the COPY which is not exactly free so maybe killing at the end of
>>>>> transaction would be better (both for refresh and drop)?
>>>>
>>>> Attached patch makes table sync worker check its relation subscription
>>>> state at the end of COPY and exits if it has disappeared, instead of
>>>> killing table sync worker in DDL. There is still a problem that a
>>>> table sync worker for a large table can hold a slot for a long time
>>>> even after its state is deleted. But it would be for PG11 item.
>>>
>>> Do we still need to do something about this? Should it be an open item?
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for looking at this.
>>
>> Yeah, I think it should be added to the open item list. The patch is
>> updated by Petr and discussed on another thread[1] that also addresses
>> other issues of subscription codes. 0004 patch of that thread is an
>> updated patch of the patch attached on this thread.
>>
>
> Does anyone have any opinions? Barring any objections, I'll add this
> to the open item list.
>
Added it.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center