On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 2:36 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 4:53 PM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > PFA v43, changes are:
> >
>
> I wanted to discuss 0003 patch about cascading standby's. It is not
> clear to me whether we want to allow physical standbys to further wait
> for cascading standby to sync their slots. If we allow such a feature
> one may expect even primary to wait for all the cascading standby's
> because otherwise still logical subscriber can be ahead of one of the
> cascading standby. I feel even if we want to allow such a behaviour we
> can do it later once the main feature is committed. I think it would
> be good to just allow logical walsenders on primary to wait for
> physical standbys represented by GUC 'standby_slot_names'. If we agree
> on that then it would be good to prohibit setting this GUC on standby
> or at least it should be a no-op even if this GUC should be set on
> physical standby.
>
> Thoughts?
IMHO, why not keep the behavior consistent across primary and standby?
I mean if it doesn't require a lot of new code/design addition then
it should be the user's responsibility. I mean if the user has set
'standby_slot_names' on standby then let standby also wait for
cascading standby to sync their slots? Is there any issue with that
behavior?
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
