Re: Replication slot drop message is sent after pgstats shutdown.

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Replication slot drop message is sent after pgstats shutdown.
Date: 2021-08-31 17:39:36
Message-ID: 20210831173936.czhs75gjcl2kacfh@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2021-08-31 18:34:12 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Tue, 31 Aug 2021 17:14:45 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 2:34 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2021-08-31 14:22:39 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > > You mean to move only the part of sending the message to its own
> > > > before_shmem_exit() callback? or move ReplicationSlotRelease() and
> > > > ReplicationSlotCleanup() from ProcKill() to it?
> > >
> > > The latter.
> >
> > Makes sense.
> >
> > I've attached the patch that moves them to its own
> > before_shmem_exit(). Unless I missed to register the callback it works
> > the same as before except for where to release and clean up the slots.
>
> Is there any reason we need to register the callback dynamically? It
> seems to me what we need to do here is to call the functions at
> before-shmem-exit.

+1. I'd just add a ReplicationSlotInitialize() to BaseInit().

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-08-31 17:40:13 Re: Patch: shouldn't timezone(text, timestamp[tz]) be STABLE?
Previous Message John Naylor 2021-08-31 17:34:06 Re: Patch: shouldn't timezone(text, timestamp[tz]) be STABLE?