Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 09:00:37PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 6:54 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 05:55:05PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 3:42 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> > > Please see the attached v28 patch.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > 1 === sorry I missed it in the previous review
> >
> > if (!(RecoveryInProgress() && slot->data.synced))
> > + {
> > now = GetCurrentTimestamp();
> > + update_inactive_since = true;
> > + }
> > + else
> > + update_inactive_since = false;
> >
> > I think update_inactive_since is not needed, we could rely on (now > 0) instead.
>
> Thought of using it, but, at the expense of readability. I prefer to
> use a variable instead.

That's fine too.

> However, I changed the variable to be more meaningful to is_slot_being_synced.

Yeah makes sense and even easier to read.

v29-0001 LGTM.

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com