Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Date
Msg-id 20240303214434.GA3036597@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 11:40:00PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 3:41 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Would you ever see "conflict" as false and "invalidation_reason" as
>> non-null for a logical slot?
> 
> No. Because both conflict and invalidation_reason are decided based on
> the invalidation reason i.e. value of slot_contents.data.invalidated.
> IOW, a logical slot that reports conflict as true must have been
> invalidated.
> 
> Do you have any thoughts on reverting 007693f and introducing
> invalidation_reason?

Unless I am misinterpreting some details, ISTM we could rename this column
to invalidation_reason and use it for both logical and physical slots.  I'm
not seeing a strong need for another column.  Perhaps I am missing
something...

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Improve performance of subsystems on top of SLRU
Next
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Add new error_action COPY ON_ERROR "log"