public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <[email protected]>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <[email protected]>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
Cc: SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM <[email protected]>
Cc: Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <[email protected]>
Cc: John H <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age based replication slot invalidation
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 01:46:36 +0530
Message-ID: <CAFC+b6pO44=zGqwijzrcyGGTYCM51Y7zS5uQX0_nWjsxW9i3QQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALj2ACUenekLgjMr8x4DyuU=zKZ4eNqW9XF-1PovSctkY2VA0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+-JvFsMHckBMzsu5Ov9HCG3AFbMh056hHy1FiXazBRtZ9pFBg@mail.gmail.com>
<OSCPR01MB149667506BCFD684FEFDCB919F511A@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<CALj2ACUmPbkcj4y4oeXvzUkBejG68QDtrFF7QHDC_qz2vQcTCg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHg+QDfnK7tQxsEZox=kOkYfqANmL70mwn0N=eRrJxE1Z+1ygg@mail.gmail.com>
<CALj2ACX_o+dKeAaK76mpAtG646UnDHpGUWziUkCvicVz8mz6=A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD21AoATM=Un8ejnbcDQ7q+CaCoxpkA7Ln9bacvQEoymqvjPug@mail.gmail.com>
<CALj2ACUmUb=CLEyfsQrW0WAkF6Y9fiBfG6pnPjepfOM7A1XReA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD21AoAg6x57a8LoP2s+0vgizp9QGHcLGJL9bwh7kzEJq3arBg@mail.gmail.com>
<CALj2ACWcaSkfMAQu3s6ZkTZuoFvVRD=DkxXbBwC33PL9+kzsqw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAD21AoBEBqQONiZxvnUYOu814yB2tRPrmX=7KqvL+f3ae7250w@mail.gmail.com>
<CALj2ACUenekLgjMr8x4DyuU=zKZ4eNqW9XF-1PovSctkY2VA0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Hello,
Thanks for the v5 patch set, I have reviewed and did initial testing on
v5 patch set, and it LGTM, except these
diff --git a/src/backend/replication/slot.c b/src/backend/replication/slot.c
index 286f0f46341..c2ff7e464f0 100644
--- a/src/backend/replication/slot.c
+++ b/src/backend/replication/slot.c
@@ -1849,7 +1849,7 @@
ReportSlotInvalidation(ReplicationSlotInvalidationCause cause,
else
{
/* translator: %s is a GUC variable
name */
- appendStringInfo(&err_detail,
_("The slot's xmin %u is %d transactions old, which exceeds the configured
\"%s\" value of %d."),
+ appendStringInfo(&err_detail,
_("The slot's catalog_xmin %u is %d transactions old, which exceeds the
configured \"%s\" value of %d."),
catalog_xmin, (int32) (recentXid - catalog_xmin), "max_slot_xid_age",
max_slot_xid_age);
}
while testing the active slot XID age invalidation (SIGTERM path) , i
observed that slot got invalidated , walsender was killed because of
SIGTERM , then starts the infinite-retry-cycle problem where
walreceiver starts walsender and walsender will try to use an invalidated
slot and dies, will think more on this.
--
Thanks,
Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
view thread (31+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age based replication slot invalidation
In-Reply-To: <CAFC+b6pO44=zGqwijzrcyGGTYCM51Y7zS5uQX0_nWjsxW9i3QQ@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox