Skip to content

branch-4.0: [Fix](StreamingJob) fix postgres consumer data in multi backend #59798 #59841

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit into from
Jan 14, 2026
Merged

branch-4.0: [Fix](StreamingJob) fix postgres consumer data in multi backend #59798 #59841

yiguolei merged 1 commit into from
Jan 14, 2026
+133 −26

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Jan 13, 2026

Cherry-picked from #59798

@JNSimba
[Fix](StreamingJob) fix postgres consumer data in multi backend (#59798)
4102f57 
### What problem does this PR solve?

Related PR: #59461

1. PostgreSQL uses slots for data consumption, but only one client can
use a slot at a time. Therefore, after consuming data from the WAL
phase, the slot needs to be closed. This doesn't affect MySQL, but it
can be closed to avoid consuming connections.
2. Create pg slot first when create job
3. fix unstable case
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner January 13, 2026 12:27
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented Jan 13, 2026

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@dataroaring dataroaring reopened this Jan 13, 2026
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented Jan 13, 2026

run buildall

@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

hello-stephen commented Jan 13, 2026

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.00% (0/35) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@JNSimba
Copy link
Member

JNSimba commented Jan 13, 2026

run p0

@github-actions github-actions bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Jan 14, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor Author

github-actions bot commented Jan 14, 2026

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor Author

github-actions bot commented Jan 14, 2026

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit f8aed3b into branch-4.0 Jan 14, 2026
25 of 28 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the auto-pick-59798-branch-4.0 branch January 14, 2026 02:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@yiguolei yiguolei yiguolei approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@Thearas @hello-stephen @JNSimba @yiguolei @dataroaring