MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAD21AoAd0BX0L17YxSCbSNbj=3V7dvLVGY0WhwLHAt724rNCZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZgulmKzdqxuBuhCU@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CAJpy0uBthb-RG=Xg+mM-G6Xy01JLcBsizJuz+xbti08qP_W7AQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVfDBcbybgyga7ia_KiQPAfEi_3=VDOGf2VU8RkJZSQpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zg0QgarM9UlRutLw@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CALj2ACUmp-F+irHYfNhmo_9yaCo7aGi7ZB20KQcDR3S9eT56hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zg1WqRS/gQrLG2vl@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CALj2ACUBiRLHF7VYD-0nYVHSvVBSCQ_5OMbP4tE8Ys_rpvQ--A@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zg2DgfXorAXrC8lw@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CALj2ACXbUzp-9tixeUK_dws5k+ARJaXxj8cj9W3adA0XNUS4Hg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zg+rvmqjL3DfbJdx@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CALj2ACW8SYiRL8vGAhez=FdrzxO0W5pVFvN8GF7yKCO8_c=QdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1+-ipXB+LuUiDNQ5L+sWJFpzK89k-Oc7xOG37AefrptoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACWhTY9mRc7sOpuao=GGidRjCVXc0SNtJ_DNman4nh5CcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVY+Fd5vC0VjW=5VDK9mmt-Y+PDZxnBp8ngGAZc24Vv9g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACX0FVrx9f0c2g19Rb-WAJhm3wdyttde3YQtkotL6bUveA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXQNGXokgx8APwdxrG4MHMF=cOz6XQtUL7EHua9oUfkgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDZPOc7pY4E0zJ2om0MZLMt+UuiX-VLsJyRO_aSyR8DsnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVu0EJ+QQ7W0oHbL_+hCtk+p-00MNhE4hfjFcXaMepMfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1KVbicrQQbMLEQiHEi9=VJpxrErrK7CiMamwaMPfff3WA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXe8+xSNdMXTMaSRWUwX7v61Ad4iddUwnn=djSwx3GLLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PuFzCHPCiZbpoQX59kgZbebuWT0gR0O7rOe4t_sdYu=OA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACUJg2faYd-_Wr3NWoj_GtbW5Bje3G9+o595GyEhcBkbrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PuC7nwuT3+36zsLxtBAcUHrSaysrHb0_dxTXqMnFBKZBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACWXQT3_HY40ceqKf1DadjLQP6b1r=0sZRh-xhAOd-b0pA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHut+PtJxxaVhjDCFPqE_V63VaAN_bL+PHRMak=dkghoGrZc0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACXjkM4nEE5dXeV=NA2NmbE3AmonKEgudYBMqU3qO9-9fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uAwxc49Dz6t=-y_-z-MU+A4RWX4BR3Zri_jj2qgGMq_8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uC6nN3SLbEuCvz7-CpaPdNdXxH=feW5MhYQch-JWV0tLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uBXXJC6f04+FU1axKaU+p78wN0SEhUNE9XoqbjXj=hhgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uB48aCJX8gpwwv-kGoOK3WYXWatB=1pgr__UW-OjwKkDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM44oW0dQa6Vv5c4xcY54rvhaKsBOpbDVaYzf0F3hUZFPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALDaNm2VQW_gpOJ-QWkEA_h18DN31ELEz2_7QmwWCAg9=Zew4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM5141FHGvfNYD=pCybLDpmEWbRXFJW3HnEoieMScZ62-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALDaNm0g86wD2=bQdFOy0smsP0MZWyz0CUqXej=Qi-hCEeqkag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM6A3xsedesUWaQYnOM+mAGGj--N2ohoLrk2tO-W8UfR5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHut+Pvi-g+9+hjmjg44OzTN9L3YGQiCXBDAVaTVWvSn5SSwmw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdArM4QR7LPoJ_ES+_1miQZ9ziwsOUun4FGSDhPdrxsugH_0A@mail.gmail.com> <CAHut+Ps=H6EBO1ssGfykrJfUQQGh76L0eKuU5XkR9GMs96ZT3g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHut+Ps=H6EBO1ssGfykrJfUQQGh76L0eKuU5XkR9GMs96ZT3g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 18:07:32 +0530
Message-ID: <CABdArM6GxefwYvNabR9=Gh_x3m9acavSa0Y-eGyAexPgfJGQTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
To: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>, 
	Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, 
	Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>, 
	Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, 
	Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, 
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABdArM6GxefwYvNabR9%3DGh_x3m9acavSa0Y-eGyAexPgfJGQTQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 5:20=E2=80=AFAM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
>
> Hi Nisha. Here are some review comments for patch v51-0002.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> src/backend/replication/slot.c
>
> ReplicationSlotAcquire:
>
> 2.
> GENERAL.
>
> This just is a question/idea. It may not be feasible to change. It
> seems like there is a lot of overlap between the error messages in
> 'ReplicationSlotAcquire' which are saying "This slot has been
> invalidated because...", and with the other function
> 'ReportSlotInvalidation' which is kind of the same but called in
> different circumstances and with slightly different message text. I
> wondered if there is a way to use common code to unify these messages
> instead of having a nearly duplicate set of messages for all the
> invalidation causes?
>

The error handling could be moved to a new function; however, as you
pointed out, the contexts in which these functions are called differ.
IMO, a single error message may not suit both cases. For example,
ReportSlotInvalidation provides additional details and a hint in its
message, which isn=E2=80=99t necessary for ReplicationSlotAcquire.
Thoughts?

--
Thanks,
Nisha