Re: replication_slots usability issue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: replication_slots usability issue
Date
Msg-id 20181029190218.uejy5cvgzygwrguy@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to replication_slots usability issue  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: replication_slots usability issue  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2018-Oct-29, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> -Hackers,
> 
> 
> Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue where
> the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there were stale
> replication slots from a recent base backup. I went to drop the replication
> slots and found that since the wal_level was set to minimal vs replica or
> higher, I couldn't drop the replication slot. Clearly that makes sense for
> creating a replication slot but it seems like an artificial limitation for
> dropping them.

This sounds closely related to
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180508143725.mn3ivlyvgpul6ovr%40alvherre.pgsql
(commit a1f680d962ff) wherein we made it possible to drop a slot in
single-user mode.

Seems worth fixing.  Send a patch?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: date_trunc() in a specific time zone
Next
From: chenhj
Date:
Subject: Connections hang indefinitely while taking a gin index's LWLockbuffer_content lock