Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation

On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 2:47 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 2:42 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 01:44:43PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 12:50:38AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:11 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> > > > <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >> On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 03:44:34PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > > >> > 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.
> > > >>
> > > >> Yeah having two columns was more for convenience purpose. Without the "conflict"
> > > >> one, a slot conflicting with recovery would be "a logical slot having a non NULL
> > > >> invalidation_reason".
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm also fine with one column if most of you prefer that way.
> > > >
> > > > While we debate on the above, please find the attached v7 patch set
> > > > after rebasing.
> > >
> > > It looks like Bertrand is okay with reusing the same column for both
> > > logical and physical slots
> >
> > Yeah, I'm okay with one column.
>
> Thanks. v8-0001 is how it looks. Please see the v8 patch set with this change.

JFYI, the patch does not apply to the head. There is a conflict in
multiple files.

thanks
Shveta