On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:20 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:21 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > I agree the current name seems too generic and the suggested ' synchronized_standby_slots '
> > is better than the current one.
> >
> > Some other ideas could be:
> >
> > synchronize_slots_on_standbys: it indicates that the standbys that enabled
> > slot sync should be listed in this GUC.
> >
> > logical_replication_wait_slots: it means the logical replication(logical
> > Walsender process) will wait for these slots to advance the confirm flush
> > lsn before proceeding.
>
> I feel that the name that has some connection to "logical replication"
> also sounds good. Let me add some ideas:
>
> - logical_replication_synchronous_standby_slots (might be too long)
> - logical_replication_synchronous_slots
>
I see your point about keeping logical_replication in the name but
that could also lead one to think that this list can contain logical
slots. OTOH, there is some value in keeping '_standby_' in the name as
that is more closely associated with physical standby's and this list
contains physical slots corresponding to physical standby's. So, my
preference is in order as follows: synchronized_standby_slots,
wait_for_standby_slots, logical_replication_wait_slots,
logical_replication_synchronous_slots, and
logical_replication_synchronous_standby_slots.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
