From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
Date: | 2024-03-20 03:28:05 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KZyjdn7oXS3d7qJU5ag9ss4xSk0Jkjsh5NOrRdkPkV1g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 12:49 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> Following are some open points:
>
> 1. Where to do inactive_timeout invalidation exactly if not the checkpointer.
>
I have suggested to do it at the time of CheckpointReplicationSlots()
and Bertrand suggested to do it whenever we resume using the slot. I
think we should follow both the suggestions.
> 2. Where to do XID age invalidation exactly if not the checkpointer.
> 3. How to go about recomputing XID horizons based on max_slot_xid_age.
> Does the slot's horizon's need to be adjusted in ComputeXidHorizons()?
>
I suggest postponing the patch for xid based invalidation for a later
discussion.
> 4. New invalidation mechanisms interaction with slot sync feature.
>
Yeah, this is important. My initial thoughts are that synced slots
shouldn't be invalidated on the standby due to timeout.
> 5. Review comments on 0001 from Bertrand.
>
> Please see the attached v12 patches.
>
Thanks for quickly updating the patches.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | jian he | 2024-03-20 03:41:42 | Re: remaining sql/json patches |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-03-20 03:19:30 | Re: PostgreSQL 17 Release Management Team & Feature Freeze |