On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 at 17:35, Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 1:29 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Attached is the v49 patch set:
> > > - Fixed the bug reported in [1].
> > > - Addressed comments in [2] and [3].
> > >
> > > I've split the patch into two, implementing the suggested idea in
> > > comment #5 of [2] separately in 001:
> > >
> > > Patch-001: Adds additional error reports (for all invalidation types)
> > > in ReplicationSlotAcquire() for invalid slots when error_if_invalid =
> > > true.
> > > Patch-002: The original patch with comments addressed.
> >
> > This Assert can fail:
> >
>
> Attached v50 patch-set addressing review comments in [1] and [2].
We are setting inactive_since when the replication slot is released.
We are marking the slot as inactive only if it has been released.
However, there's a scenario where the network connection between the
publisher and subscriber may be lost where the replication slot is not
released, but no changes are replicated due to the network problem. In
this case, no updates would occur in the replication slot for a period
exceeding the replication_slot_inactive_timeout.
Should we invalidate these replication slots as well, or is it
intentionally left out?
Regards,
Vignesh
