Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jMGV4-0002fL-2b for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 19:36:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jMGV1-0007eH-RR for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 19:36:35 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jMGV1-0007eA-Io for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 19:36:35 +0000 Received: from cyclops.postgrespro.ru ([93.174.131.138] helo=mail.postgrespro.ru) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jMGUx-0002ak-U3 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 19:36:34 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.postgrespro.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BDE421C5970; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 22:36:29 +0300 (MSK) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at postgrespro.ru X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=x tagged_above=-99 required=4 WHITELISTED tests=[] autolearn=unavailable Received: from mail.postgrespro.ru (cyclops.l.postgrespro.ru [192.168.27.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.postgrespro.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E249521C596E; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 22:36:28 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=postgrespro.ru; s=mail; t=1586374589; bh=glReMoQoI+TeBlWfPCh6k2uaCrMm6SYDQtbNcXxT/0s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=JRNjWZKeNTt7epzpGWG85IulX5VXYfLg0X8KxF1Dfaho05W3TLVTwdd1wgVtCq9ty fMOm3KPsl5BbwrWbVCFT1HHfG2i673EHJIk6HFF6B3qyCHaUC+ffzWte5K0l0LUP8Y uDWXmvQxN4pMktAcetw8VtnnhTr3ssuoWYRvbbxM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 22:36:28 +0300 From: Anna Akenteva To: Kyotaro Horiguchi Cc: a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru, i.kartyshov@postgrespro.ru, amit.kapila16@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us Subject: Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed In-Reply-To: <20200408.100945.375702947246835193.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> References: <20200408.100945.375702947246835193.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.0 Message-ID: X-Sender: a.akenteva@postgrespro.ru Organization: Postgres Professional List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On 2020-04-08 04:09, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > How about something like the follows. > > BEGIN AFTER ColId Sconst > BEGIN FOLOWING ColId Sconst > > UNTIL ; > LIMIT BY ; > WITHIN Iconst; > > regards. I like your suggested keywords! I think that "AFTER" + "WITHIN" sound the most natural. We could completely give up the LSN keyword for now. The final command could look something like: BEGIN AFTER ‘0/303EC60’ WITHIN '5 seconds'; or BEGIN AFTER ‘0/303EC60’ WITHIN 5000; I'd like to hear others' opinions on the syntax as well. -- Anna Akenteva Postgres Professional: The Russian Postgres Company http://www.postgrespro.com