Re: synchronized_standby_slots behavior inconsistent with quorum-based synchronous replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 12:03 PM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 11:36 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Makes sense. The attached patch addresses this too.
> >
> > --
>
> Thanks Ashutosh. I have not yet looked at today's patch, please find a
> few comments from previous one:
>
> 1)
> I noticed a change in behavior compared to the HEAD.
>
> Earlier, inactive slots were considered blocking only if they were
> lagging (restart_lsn < wait_for_lsn). Now, inactive slots are treated
> as blocking regardless of their restart_lsn. I think we should revert
> to the previous behavior. It’s possible for a slot to catch up and
> then become inactive; in such cases, it should still be treated as
> caught up rather than blocking.
>

Oh, absolutely, you're spot on. I will get this (and other things
related to this) fixed in the next patch. Thanks for pointing it out.

--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma.