Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From shveta malik
Subject Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Date
Msg-id CAJpy0uCbdVwybRsj0EtQtcPRXjPsNWZHdm66EY31ke+FJ5HZRQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation  (shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 6:05 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > We can think on that later if we really need another
> > field which give us sync time.
>
> I think that calling GetCurrentTimestamp() so frequently could be too costly, so
> I'm not sure we should.

Agreed.

> > In my second approach, I have tried to
> > avoid updating inactive_since for synced slots during sync process. We
> > update that field during creation of synced slot so that
> > inactive_since reflects correct info even for synced slots (rather
> > than copying from primary).
>
> Yeah, and I think we could create a dedicated field with this information
> if we feel the need.

Okay.

thanks
Shveta



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Will Mortensen
Date:
Subject: Re: Exposing the lock manager's WaitForLockers() to SQL
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is parula failing?