On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 8:07 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 6:14 PM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
> <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:46 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:37 PM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
> > > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > I'm slightly concerned that there could be overhead of executing
> > > GetLeaderApplyWorkerPid () for every backend process except for parallel
> > > query workers. The number of such backends could be large and
> > > GetLeaderApplyWorkerPid() acquires the lwlock. For example, does it make
> > > sense to check (st_backendType == B_BG_WORKER) before calling
> > > GetLeaderApplyWorkerPid()? Or it might not be a problem since it's
> > > LogicalRepWorkerLock which is not likely to be contended.
> >
> > Thanks for the comment and I think your suggestion makes sense.
> > I have added the check before getting the leader pid. Here is the new version patch.
>
> Thank you for updating the patch. Looks good to me.
>
Pushed.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
