Re: Unexpected Standby Shutdown on sync_replication_slots change
| От | Hugo DUBOIS |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Unexpected Standby Shutdown on sync_replication_slots change |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAH0PTU8wWFzss6GT6x4HngVbzJSyDDn_9pTQXJBSbfPQ8CGB_g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Unexpected Standby Shutdown on sync_replication_slots change (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
I'm okay with that too, as long as the standby doesn't unexpectedly quit. The patch looks good to me.
Le ven. 25 juil. 2025 à 18:01, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> a écrit :
On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 9:13 PM Hugo DUBOIS <hdubois@scaleway.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure if there's a particular use case for wal_level and sync_replication_slots not matching on a primary. So, for me, Option 1 seems correct.
I also prefer option #1.
However, on second thought, if some users are already running a server
(non-standby) with sync_replication_slots enabled and wal_level != logical
in v17, switching to option #1 could break their setup after a minor
version update. That would be surprising and confusing.
To avoid that, I think we should go with option #2—at least for v17.
Attached is an updated patch implementing option #2.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: