Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 10:12:15 +0000
From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>,
	Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
	Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot
 invalidation
Message-ID: <ZfgTf77NL2xOSldF@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
References: <CAA4eK1+NUeb21bYa9K5mVsFHcw-xodGLkN9QoqJXym7sD3LtZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVr8ra-yp8CwiBq=Pc9Kkq64z=zDvoFxMK3K4wSDhKMmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1KxsMg4bnxRZ0U3dZ3irFoR2=TfUCOFig3ccHoRPp5iWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACU-sJdiLfAcWd+8hnt4HSojH0UWFGnaGr9gxb2bYzYYSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1++=fOpmsQKugQQRtQr2wmiintjKEhpuOch9=phxirAfg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVd_dizYQiZwwUfsb+hG-fhGYo_kEDq0wn_vNwQvOrZHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA4eK1+02XhKht3EB=RgzQ=2zyb9Sv4=9iC=yt1j4FfVy0-5kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACVRS2LZbycpM8rZT8QynR05AtvttOHfFOhczjyqU7zZSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uChxSm7pod6CQwU4z4pSvV03b4iRCy_9zb0zVbSs__qOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALj2ACWBbSa7ccOGDHNfH1OX7_ArBJm1kNmc=iWKSfqq1NHnuA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALj2ACWBbSa7ccOGDHNfH1OX7_ArBJm1kNmc=iWKSfqq1NHnuA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZfgTf77NL2xOSldF%40ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 09:29:01AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Please see the attached v11 patch set with all the above review
> comments addressed.

Thanks!

Looking at 0001:

1 ===

+       True if this logical slot conflicted with recovery (and so is now
+       invalidated). When this column is true, check

Worth to add back the physical slot mention "Always NULL for physical slots."?

2 ===

@@ -1023,9 +1023,10 @@ CREATE VIEW pg_replication_slots AS
             L.wal_status,
             L.safe_wal_size,
             L.two_phase,
-            L.conflict_reason,
+            L.conflicting,
             L.failover,
-            L.synced
+            L.synced,
+            L.invalidation_reason

What about making invalidation_reason close to conflict_reason?

3 ===

- * Maps a conflict reason for a replication slot to
+ * Maps a invalidation reason for a replication slot to

s/a invalidation/an invalidation/?

4 ===

While at it, shouldn't we also rename "conflict" to say "invalidation_cause" in
InvalidatePossiblyObsoleteSlot()?

5 ===

+ * rows_removed and wal_level_insufficient are only two reasons

s/are only two/are the only two/?

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com