Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart

From: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart
Date: 2025-09-25 11:57:09
Message-ID: CAJpy0uCqgQkZg8t9DAtaWuT5w4Az=5ocCge2pieiZo+hp1db-Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 3:28 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> I've attached the updated patch. It incorporates all comments I got so
> far and implements to lazily disable logical decoding. It's used only
> when the process tries to disable logical decoding during process
> exit.
>

I am resuming the review now. I agree with the discussion of lazily
disabling logical decoding on ERROR or process-exit for temp-slot.

Few initial comments:

1)
I see that on standby too, during proc-exit, we set 'pending_disable'.
But it never resets it, as DisableLogicalDecodingIfNecessary is no-op
on standby. And thus the checkpoint keeps on attempting to reset it
everytime. Do we even need to set it on standby?

Logfile has repeated: 'start completing pending logical decoding
disable request'

2)
+ ereport(LOG,
+ (errmsg("skip disabling logical decoding as during process exit")));

'as' not needed.

thanks
Shveta

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-09-25 12:36:33 Re: allow benign typedef redefinitions (C11)
Previous Message Artem Gavrilov 2025-09-25 11:13:24 Re: Non-blocking archiver process