| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: How can end users know the cause of LR slot sync delays? |
| Date: | 2025-11-21 06:00:25 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JM+roQMyXekvwJprMMaK_-HL+n5twinZQ8fufnDEU28g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 11:00 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> A few comments on 001:
>
> 1)
> + slots, but may (if leftover from a promotedstandby) contain a
> timestamp.
> promotedstandby --> promoted standby
>
> 2)
> + s.slotsync_skip_count,
> + s.last_slotsync_skip_at,
>
> Shall we rename last_slotsync_skip_at to slotsync_last_skip_at. That
> way all slotsync related stats columns will have same prefix.
>
Sounds reasonable especially when the doc explains that this is the
time at which last slot synchronization was skipped.
BTW, can we split the patch into two? First for slot sync skip stats,
and the second one for SlotSyncSkipReason? It would be easier to
review and commit that way.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2025-11-21 06:14:38 | RE: Newly created replication slot may be invalidated by checkpoint |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2025-11-21 05:57:08 | Re: Row pattern recognition |