On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:46 PM Fujii Masao
<masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> How about using PGC_USERSET instead of PGC_SIGHUP, similar to
> wal_sender_timeout?
Dear Fujii, thanks for the review!
Current version of the patch suggests changing the shutdown mode of
logical senders globally for the server. As I wrote above: patch
excludes receiver's side decision whether the sender is allowed to hang
on shutdown. In addition, it provides simpler administration of a system.
But I'm ready to hear other opinions on this matter.
> Shouldn't physical replication walsenders also honor this parameter?
> For example, the immediate mode seems useful for physical walsenders
connected
> from a very remote standby (e.g., DR site). Thought?
As discussed earlier, physical replication is more sensitive to data
divergence and there is no problem with apply_worker and backend lock
conflict, which makes the use-case more narrow.
By the way, does anyone find the name of IMMEDIATE mode too similar to
the "pg_ctl stop" mode and a little confusing? Initially, I planned
to call this mode WALSND_SHUTDOWN_MODE_FORCED instead of
WALSND_SHUTDOWN_MODE_IMMEDIATE.
Best Regards,
Andrey Silitskiy
