Re: Proposal: recent access based routing for primary-replica setups

Thank you so much for the help with this! And for the suggestions.

Let’s change the document to match then implementation in this case.
Should I share an updated patch or will you modify it on merge?

Nadav Shatz
Tailor Brands | CTO

On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 1:59 AM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:

> And... attached is the Japanese document. For those who are interested.
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> SRA OSS K.K.
> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
>
> >> Thanks for the help! please find attached the latest version with all
> >> changes and test passing.
> >
> > Thanks for updating patch! I confirmed that all test have passed on my
> > Ubunu box. Now I am working on Japanese document. While working on
> > it, I did followings to the English document. (see attached)
> >
> > - Reformat it so that each line is not too long. Like PostgreSQL, I
> > bend each line at most 78 chars. (I know other parts of document do
> > not follow the rule but I do not want to add more lines not
> > following the rule).
> >
> > - Move replication_delay_source_cmd (string) and
> > replication_delay_source_timeout (integer) at the bottom of
> > "5.12. Streaming Replication Check" section. We usually add the new
> > parameters at the bottom of the page if there's no particular
> > reason. Previously they were in between prefer_lower_delay_standby
> > and log_standby_delay.
> >
> > - Add following to replication_delay_source_cmd. "The line can be
> > terminated with or without a new line character." This is observed
> > from the implementation. I believe this matters for those who try to
> > implement replication_delay_source_cmd.
> >
> > Lastly I have one question.
> >
> > replication_delay_source_timeout (integer)
> >
> > Specifies the timeout in seconds for the external command
> > specified by replication_delay_source_cmd. If the command does not
> > finish within the timeout, Pgpool-II logs an error and continues
> > using the built-in method.
> >
> > It seems this ("continues using the built-in method") is different
> > from the actual behavior. It seems that after timeout, the external
> > command is tried and timeout.... Do you want to fix the source code to
> > match with the document? Or change (just remove ""continues using the
> > built-in method") the document? I am fine with changing the document.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > --
> > Tatsuo Ishii
> > SRA OSS K.K.
> > English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
> > Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
>