public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Ajin Cherian <[email protected]>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]>
Cc: shveta malik <[email protected]>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:50:38 +1000
Message-ID: <CAFPTHDZPOc7pY4E0zJ2om0MZLMt+UuiX-VLsJyRO_aSyR8DsnA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALj2ACXQNGXokgx8APwdxrG4MHMF=cOz6XQtUL7EHua9oUfkgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD21AoAd0BX0L17YxSCbSNbj=3V7dvLVGY0WhwLHAt724rNCZA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAJpy0uBthb-RG=Xg+mM-G6Xy01JLcBsizJuz+xbti08qP_W7AQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALj2ACVfDBcbybgyga7ia_KiQPAfEi_3=VDOGf2VU8RkJZSQpw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CALj2ACUmp-F+irHYfNhmo_9yaCo7aGi7ZB20KQcDR3S9eT56hg@mail.gmail.com>
<Zg1WqRS/[email protected]>
<CALj2ACUBiRLHF7VYD-0nYVHSvVBSCQ_5OMbP4tE8Ys_rpvQ--A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CALj2ACXbUzp-9tixeUK_dws5k+ARJaXxj8cj9W3adA0XNUS4Hg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<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>
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 4:01 PM Bharath Rupireddy <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 5:55 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Please find the attached v41 patches implementing the idea of vacuum
> doing the invalidation.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
Some minor comments on the patch:
1.
+ /*
+ * Release the lock if it's not yet to keep the cleanup path on
+ * error happy.
+ */
I suggest rephrasing to: " "Release the lock if it hasn't been already to
ensure smooth cleanup on error."
2.
elog(DEBUG1, "performing replication slot invalidation");
Probably change it to "performing replication slot invalidation checks" as
we might not actually invalidate any slot here.
3.
In CheckPointReplicationSlots()
+ invalidated =
InvalidateObsoleteReplicationSlots(RS_INVAL_INACTIVE_TIMEOUT,
+ 0,
+ InvalidOid,
+ InvalidTransactionId);
+
+ if (invalidated)
+ {
+ /*
+ * If any slots have been invalidated, recalculate the resource
+ * limits.
+ */
+ ReplicationSlotsComputeRequiredXmin(false);
+ ReplicationSlotsComputeRequiredLSN();
+ }
Is this calculation of resource limits really required here when the same
is already done inside InvalidateObsoleteReplicationSlots()
regards,
Ajin Cherian
Fujitsu Australia
view thread (98+ 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], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
In-Reply-To: <CAFPTHDZPOc7pY4E0zJ2om0MZLMt+UuiX-VLsJyRO_aSyR8DsnA@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