Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
От | Nathan Bossart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20240305194443.GA3481820@nathanxps13 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 12:50:38AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:11 PM Bertrand Drouvot > <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 03:44:34PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote: >> > Unless I am misinterpreting some details, ISTM we could rename this column >> > to invalidation_reason and use it for both logical and physical slots. I'm >> > not seeing a strong need for another column. >> >> Yeah having two columns was more for convenience purpose. Without the "conflict" >> one, a slot conflicting with recovery would be "a logical slot having a non NULL >> invalidation_reason". >> >> I'm also fine with one column if most of you prefer that way. > > While we debate on the above, please find the attached v7 patch set > after rebasing. It looks like Bertrand is okay with reusing the same column for both logical and physical slots, which IIUC is what you initially proposed in v1 of the patch set. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: