| From: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(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>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
| Date: | 2024-09-18 06:51:56 |
| Message-ID: | CAJpy0uAwxc49Dz6t=-y_-z-MU+A4RWX4BR3Zri_jj2qgGMq_8g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 3:31 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> Please find the attached v46 patch having changes for the above review
> comments and your test review comments and Shveta's review comments.
>
Thanks for addressing comments.
Is there a reason that we don't support this invalidation on hot
standby for non-synced slots? Shouldn't we support this time-based
invalidation there too just like other invalidations?
thanks
Shveta
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florents Tselai | 2024-09-18 07:03:33 | Get TupleDesc for extension-defined types |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2024-09-18 06:21:44 | Re: proposal: schema variables |