| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
| Date: | 2024-03-03 21:44:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20240303214434.GA3036597@nathanxps13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 11:40:00PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 3:41 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Would you ever see "conflict" as false and "invalidation_reason" as
>> non-null for a logical slot?
>
> No. Because both conflict and invalidation_reason are decided based on
> the invalidation reason i.e. value of slot_contents.data.invalidated.
> IOW, a logical slot that reports conflict as true must have been
> invalidated.
>
> Do you have any thoughts on reverting 007693f and introducing
> invalidation_reason?
Unless I am misinterpreting some details, ISTM we could rename this column
to invalidation_reason and use it for both logical and physical slots. I'm
not seeing a strong need for another column. Perhaps I am missing
something...
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2024-03-03 23:30:00 | Re: Add new error_action COPY ON_ERROR "log" |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-03-03 21:14:49 | Re: pgsql: Improve performance of subsystems on top of SLRU |