Re: pg_recvlogical: send final feedback on SIGINT/SIGTERM exit - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ayush Tiwari
Subject Re: pg_recvlogical: send final feedback on SIGINT/SIGTERM exit
Date
Msg-id CAJTYsWVftJZdWXrppHZ+u-zN__J6ae01AS=scNnLUFXGS_cFYQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
Responses Re: pg_recvlogical: send final feedback on SIGINT/SIGTERM exit
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Fri, 29 May 2026 at 05:42, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:

Currently, when pg_recvlogical exits due to SIGINT or SIGTERM, it can
terminate after writing decoded output locally but before sending feedback
that reflects the latest written position to the server. If pg_recvlogical
is restarted after that, the server-side logical replication slot may still
remain behind those already-written changes, and the same decoded data can
be sent again.

Attached patch makes pg_recvlogical send final feedback once more during
SIGINT/SIGTERM exit, before sending CopyDone. That gives the server one more
chance to advance the slot far enough to avoid resending already-written
data after pg_recvlogical is restarted.

Thanks for the patch! 

The problem statement and solution makes sense to me.

I applied v1 and tried it locally.  It builds cleanly and the new block in
030_pg_recvlogical.pl passes.  As a sanity check I reverted just the
prepareToTerminate() change and kept the test: the "does not duplicate decoded
changes after signal shutdown" assertion then fails (the row is decoded twice
on the restart), so the test is clearly exercising the fix too. I don't see any
downside of having the fix attached.
 
One note is that this is still only a best-effort improvement.
Depending on when SIGINT or SIGTERM arrives, pg_recvlogical may already have
written decoded output that the server cannot yet safely treat as confirmed,
so duplicate data can still be received after restart. In other words, this
patch reduces the likelihood of duplicates, but does not guarantee that they
will never happen.

Agreed that this is a best-effort improvement rather than a guarantee, and
targeting v20 seems reasonable.

Regards,
Ayush 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bertrand Drouvot
Date:
Subject: Allow wal_log_hints to be changed without restart
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: BackgroundPsql swallowing errors on windows