On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 3:47 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
<houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, January 22, 2025 7:54 PM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 18, 2025 11:45 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
> > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > > I think invalidating the slot is OK and we could also let the apply
> > > worker to automatic recovery as suggested in [1].
> > >
> > > Here is the V24 patch set. I modified 0004 patch to implement the slot
> > > Invalidation part. Since the automatic recovery could be an
> > > optimization and the discussion is in progress, I didn't implement that part.
> >
> > The implementation is in progress and I will include it in next version.
> >
> > Here is the V25 patch set that includes the following change:
> >
> > 0001
> >
> > * Per off-list discussion with Amit, I added few comments to mention the
> > reason of skipping advancing xid when table sync is in progress and to mention
> > that the advancement will not be delayed if changes are filtered out on
> > publisher via row/table filter.
> >
> > 0004
> >
> > * Fixed a bug that the launcher would advance the slot.xmin when some apply
> > workers have not yet started.
> >
> > * Fixed a bug that the launcher did not advance the slot.xmin even if one of the
> > apply worker has stopped conflict retention due to the lag.
> >
> > * Add a retain_conflict_info column in the pg_stat_subscription view to
> > indicate whether the apply worker is effectively retaining conflict
> > information. The value is set to true only if retain_conflict_info is enabled
> > for the associated subscription, and the retention duration for conflict
> > detection by the apply worker has not exceeded
> > max_conflict_retention_duration. Thanks Kuroda-san for contributing codes
> > off-list.
>
> Here is V25 patch set which includes the following changes:
>
> 0004
> * Addressed Nisha's comments[1].
> * Fixed a cfbot failure[2] in the doc.
I have one question about the 0004 patch; it implemented
max_conflict_retntion_duration as a subscription parameter. But the
launcher invalidates the pg_conflict_detection slot only if all
subscriptions with retain_conflict_info stopped retaining dead tuples
due to the max_conflict_retention_duration parameter. Therefore, even
if users set the parameter to a low value to avoid table bloats, it
would not make sense if other subscriptions set it to a larger value.
Is my understanding correct?
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
