Re: Separate GUC for replication origins
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Separate GUC for replication origins |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 686a66b5-0ba0-44a2-bbb1-a9d1a2dd254f@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Separate GUC for replication origins (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Separate GUC for replication origins
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 07.03.25 04:51, Amit Kapila wrote: >>> I agree that the originally proposed name max_replication_origins is not >>> good, because you can "create" (using pg_replication_origin_create()) >>> more than the configured maximum. What is the term for what the setting >>> actually controls? How many are "active"? "In use"? Per session? etc. >>> >> It controls the number of active sessions using origin. The idea is >> that to track replication progress via replication_origin we need to >> do replorigin_session_setup(). If you look in the code, we have used >> the term replorigin_session* in many places, so we thought of naming >> this as max_replication_origin_sessions. But the other options could >> be max_active_replication_origins or max_replication_origins_in_use. >> >> >> The word "session" is correlated to "replication origin" but requires some >> knowledge to know the replication progress tracking design. The word "active" >> can express the fact that it was setup and is currently in use. I vote for >> max_active_replication_origins. >> > Sounds reasonable. Let's go with max_active_replication_origins then, > unless people think otherwise. Is that maximum active for the whole system, or maximum active per session, or maximum active per created origin, or some combination of these?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: