| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(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: | 2024-09-16 03:25:10 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1Lr4qcaH3nmTmw3p+f29YFMtWJG7HhQOQJVH0yRYs+nYw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 12:13 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 3:04 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > We should not allow the invalid replication slot to be altered
> > > > > > irrespective of the reason unless there is any benefit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, then I think we need to change the existing behaviour of the
> > > > > other invalidation causes which still allow alter-slot.
> > > >
> > > > +1. Perhaps, track it in a separate thread?
> > >
> > > I think so. It does not come under the scope of this thread.
> >
> > It makes sense to me as well. But let's go ahead and get that sorted out first.
>
> Moved the discussion to new thread -
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACW4fSOMiKjQ3%3D2NVBMTZRTG8Ujg6jsK9z3EvOtvA4vzKQ%40mail.gmail.com.
> Please have a look.
>
That is pushed now. Please send the rebased patch after addressing the
pending comments.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2024-09-16 04:12:55 | information_schema.view attgenerated |
| Previous Message | Alena Rybakina | 2024-09-16 02:53:47 | Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes |