On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 2:21 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 10:37 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:43 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > I thought we just want to lock before clearing the skip_xid something > > > like take the lock, check if the skip_xid in the catalog is the same > > > as we have skipped, if it is the same then clear it, otherwise, leave > > > it as it is. How will that disallow users to change skip_xid when we > > > are skipping changes? > > > > Oh I thought we wanted to keep holding the lock while skipping changes > > (changing skip_xid requires acquiring the lock). > > > > So if skip_xid is already changed, the apply worker would do > > replorigin_advance() with WAL logging, instead of committing the > > catalog change? > > > > Right. BTW, how are you planning to advance the origin? Normally, a > commit transaction would do it but when we are skipping all changes, > the commit might not do it as there won't be any transaction id > assigned.
I've not tested it yet but replorigin_advance() with wal_log = true seems to work for this case. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
