public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[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: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:10:16 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALj2ACUvK7ShPyirAURWf62=qOQqu=NwnyL5CMfVjM5Ody7Oxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA4eK1LF28ZTwmf3D-OQWeMdQqjB56P+iAmfWM7Bcwow3icBJQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACVtLt0rPnr4NS6c72DdtQmpyQA=qcMaVfn6vu7j5yQvzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1+7Y6bknNNentcNfkmCBfm3j2fLjA4JjVydz3TB2MTjVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACUR0=ByDv2VcqqbT0x+0T0gde7Zosb0A_8syPM63WSoFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1K7awEe1PXmmAUOoc+VnUJ76cPbYAV7mwwcW+2OxNyo7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CALj2ACXib_+Kuy3_WbTBJkURYGwO7ngS8+HYATReJtXShNCtNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1KZyjdn7oXS3d7qJU5ag9ss4xSk0Jkjsh5NOrRdkPkV1g@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CALj2ACUvK7ShPyirAURWf62=qOQqu=NwnyL5CMfVjM5Ody7Oxw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 05:05:46AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 1:04 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 08:58:05AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 12:49 AM Bharath Rupireddy
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Following are some open points:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Where to do inactive_timeout invalidation exactly if not the checkpointer.
> > > >
> > > I have suggested to do it at the time of CheckpointReplicationSlots()
> > > and Bertrand suggested to do it whenever we resume using the slot. I
> > > think we should follow both the suggestions.
> >
> > Agree. I also think that pg_get_replication_slots() would be a good place, so
> > that queries would return the right invalidation status.
> 
> I've addressed review comments and attaching the v13 patches with the
> following changes:

Thanks!

v13-0001 looks good to me. The only Nit (that I've mentioned up-thread) is that
in the pg_replication_slots view, the invalidation_reason is "far away" from the
conflicting field. I understand that one could query the fields individually but
when describing the view or reading the doc, it seems more appropriate to see
them closer. Also as "failover" and "synced" are also new in version 17, there
is no risk to break order by "17,18" kind of queries (which are the failover
and sync positions).

Regards,

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






view thread (18+ 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]
  Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* 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