Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Peter Smith |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
Date | |
Msg-id | CAHut+PtCpOnifF9wnhJ=jo7KLmtT=MikuYnM9GGPTVA80rq7OA@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Nisha, Some review comments for the patch v69-0002. ====== src/backend/replication/slot.c 1. +#ifdef USE_INJECTION_POINTS + + /* + * To test idle timeout slot invalidation, if the + * slot-time-out-inval injection point is attached, + * immediately invalidate the slot. + */ + if (IS_INJECTION_POINT_ATTACHED("slot-time-out-inval")) + { + invalidation_cause = cause; + inactive_since = s->inactive_since = now; + break; + } +#endif 1a. I didn't understand the reason for the assignment ' = now' here. This is not happening in the normal code path so why do you need to do this in this test code path? It works for me without doing this. ~ 1b. For testing, I think we should try to keep the injection code differences minimal -- e.g. share the same (normal build) code as much as possible. For example, I suggest refactoring like below. Well, it works for me. /* * Check if the slot needs to be invalidated due to * idle_replication_slot_timeout GUC. * * To test idle timeout slot invalidation, if the * "slot-time-out-inval" injection point is attached, * immediately invalidate the slot. */ if ( #ifdef USE_INJECTION_POINTS IS_INJECTION_POINT_ATTACHED("slot-time-out-inval") || #endif TimestampDifferenceExceedsSeconds(s->inactive_since, now, idle_replication_slot_timeout_mins * SECS_PER_MINUTE)) { invalidation_cause = cause; inactive_since = s->inactive_since; } ~ 1c. Can we call the injection point "timeout" instead of "time-out"? ====== .../t/044_invalidate_inactive_slots.pl 2. +if ($ENV{enable_injection_points} ne 'yes') +{ + plan skip_all => 'Injection points not supported by this build'; +} At first, I had no idea how to build for this test. It would be good to include a link to the injection build instructions in a comment somewhere near here. ~~~ 3. +# Wait for slot to first become idle and then get invalidated +sub wait_for_slot_invalidation +{ + my ($node, $slot, $offset) = @_; + my $node_name = $node->name; + Might be better to call the variable $slot_name instead of $slot. Also then it will be consistent with $node_name ~~~ 4. +# Check if the extension injection_points is available, as it may be +# possible that this script is run with installcheck, where the module +# would not be installed by default. I misread this comment at first -- maybe it is clearer to reverse the wording? /extension injection_points/’injection_points’ extension/ ~~~ 5. +# Run a checkpoint which will invalidate the slots +$node->safe_psql('postgres', "CHECKPOINT"); The explanation seems a bit terse -- I think the comment should elaborate a bit more to explain that CHECKPOINT is just where the idle slot timeout is checked, but since the test is using injection point and the injection code enforces immediate idle timeout THAT is why it will invalidate the slots... ~~~ 6. +# Wait for slots to become inactive. Note that nobody has acquired the slot +# yet, so it must get invalidated due to idle timeout. IIUC this comment means: SUGGESTION Note that since nobody has acquired the slot yet, then if it has been invalidated that can only be due to the idle timeout mechanism. ====== Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
pgsql-hackers by date: