| From: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Date: | 2024-02-07 09:35:32 |
| Message-ID: | CAJpy0uCNDxiZAw=0y1bW9nzxBE53M9407_Y3c74AAskQjrYxBw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 12:25 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> That said, I still think the commit message needs some re-wording, what about?
>
> =====
> If a logical slot on the primary is valid but is invalidated on the standby,
> then that slot is dropped and can be recreated on the standby in next
> pg_sync_replication_slots() call provided the slot still exists on the primary
> server. It is okay to recreate such slots as long as these are not consumable
> on the standby (which is the case currently). This situation may occur due to
> the following reasons:
>
> - The max_slot_wal_keep_size on the standby is insufficient to retain WAL
> records from the restart_lsn of the slot.
> - primary_slot_name is temporarily reset to null and the physical slot is
> removed.
>
> Changing the primary wal_level to a level lower than logical is only possible
> if the logical slots are removed on the primary, so it's expected to see
> the slots being removed on the standby too (and re-created if they are
> re-created on the primary).
> =====
Thanks for the feedback. I have incorporated the suggestions in v80.
thanks
Shveta
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-02-07 09:42:21 | Re: Is this a problem in GenericXLogFinish()? |
| Previous Message | shveta malik | 2024-02-07 09:32:40 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |