Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 17:51:40 +0100
From: hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com>
Sender: depesz@depesz.com
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs mailing list <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WAL segments removed from primary despite the fact that logical
 replication slot needs it.
Message-ID: <Y3JyHKOoDTbImPTA@depesz.com>
Reply-To: depesz@depesz.com
References: <Y00cp4sNQtFNoo25@depesz.com>
 <CAA4eK1KUMFfVrOpP7VgAPUN7rabvfr5GhcQh++T8BX-t7=e5YA@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y0/bSiDkYlhiSmOW@depesz.com>
 <Y1E3JIFqb0mFBZNR@depesz.com>
 <Y25hQCKLnolQaFN9@depesz.com>
 <CAA4eK1JSTC9uJ_CTTFxMZV6wSr2hkCX4bwtruUp9wX_K8JLo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y3Ixv1QYMxnhruNN@depesz.com>
 <CAA4eK1+h8KAGW1bvo3vECWR9-ZExp1EptOBvqWP8V-aDyvaORg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y3JDqOe8w8LBF9HO@depesz.com>
 <CAA4eK1Jn0d9d+y6j0Qd1CzsRedU_2A4c2tL3dCxn1eebg6buLA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA4eK1Jn0d9d+y6j0Qd1CzsRedU_2A4c2tL3dCxn1eebg6buLA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Y3JyHKOoDTbImPTA%40depesz.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 09:52:05PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 7:03 PM hubert depesz lubaczewski
> <depesz@depesz.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 06:30:57PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > There is something weird happening:
> > > What exactly weird you are seeing in this? To me, it appears as if the
> > > system due to some reason ignores an existing slot that has
> > > restart_lsn as 1039D/83825958.
> >
> > The weird part for me is that it is trying to remove wal files older
> > than the same "x" many times.
> >
> 
> I think that is okay because as per checkpointer's computation it
> decides not to remove/replace any new WAL files. At this stage, I am
> not getting any idea except for getting the value of
> XLogGetReplicationSlotMinimumLSN() in one of the LOG prints. If you
> can't add all the LOGs, I shared in the last patch, can you try to get
> the value of XLogGetReplicationSlotMinimumLSN() by appending to the
> existing LOG "attempting to remove WAL segments older than log file
> .."?

If I'll get *any* patch approved, and restart of client db, then it
doesn't matter how many LOGs there will be :)

Will get back to you as soon as I will have more info.

Best regards,

depesz