Re: [PATCH] Add max_logical_replication_slots GUC

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ahmed Et-tanany <ahmed(dot)ettanany(at)aiven(dot)io>
Cc: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add max_logical_replication_slots GUC
Date: 2026-02-04 00:54:57
Message-ID: CAD21AoBpEGfeX3ce_biQn6wsD+7vb5iEDbu5BV85P8kvOmotnQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 10:02 PM Ahmed Et-tanany
<ahmed(dot)ettanany(at)aiven(dot)io> wrote:
>
> Yes, that's what I meant.

FYI there is a related discussion on another thread[1]; Now that
wal_level='replica' can dynamically become 'logical' WAL level
depending on the logical slot presence, there might be users who want
to allow physical replication while not for logical replication
(decoding) to avoid overheads due to logical WAL logging. Having
separate limits for logical slots and physical slots might help such
use cases too.

Regards,

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEze2WjP0NpAjNioXzLiNkpNQcxCMtaNajaQXfufYVcyFyqW1g%40mail.gmail.com

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chao Li 2026-02-04 01:04:57 Re: Use allocation macros in the logical replication code
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2026-02-04 00:41:07 Re: pg_upgrade: optimize replication slot caught-up check