| From: | Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
| Date: | 2025-08-13 04:27:24 |
| Message-ID: | CABdArM7G1sSDDOEC-nmJRnJMCZoBsLqOMz08UotX_h_wqxHWCg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 2:40 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
<houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I agree. So, following the above points and some off-list discussions, I have
> revised the option to be a subscription option in the V60 version.
>
Thanks Hou-san for the patches.
I have tested the patches and are working as expected. I've a minor
comment for patch v60-0001.
@@ -4642,6 +4791,10 @@
adjust_xid_advance_interval(RetainDeadTuplesData *rdt_data, bool
new_xid_found)
*/
rdt_data->xid_advance_interval = Min(rdt_data->xid_advance_interval * 2,
max_interval);
+
+ /* Ensure the wait time remains within the maximum limit */
+ rdt_data->xid_advance_interval = Min(rdt_data->xid_advance_interval,
+
The function comment needs an update as per above change. Currently, it says -
* The interval is reset to a minimum value of 100ms once there is some
* activity on the node.
But if MySubscription->maxconflretention is < 100ms, then it will be
set to maxconflretention value and not 100ms.
--
Thanks,
Nisha
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shveta malik | 2025-08-13 04:47:23 | Re: Improve pg_sync_replication_slots() to wait for primary to advance |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2025-08-13 04:20:27 | Re: Parallel Apply |