On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 10:40 AM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:40 PM Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Review for v41 patch.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> >
> > 1.
> > ======
> > src/backend/utils/misc/postgresql.conf.sample
> >
> > +#enable_syncslot = on # enables slot synchronization on the physical
> > standby from the primary
> >
> > enable_syncslot is disabled by default, so, it should be 'off' here.
> >
>
> Sure, I will change it.
>
> > ~~~
> > 2.
> > IIUC, the slotsyncworker's connection to the primary is to execute a
> > query. Its aim is not walsender type connection, but at primary when
> > queried, the 'backend_type' is set to 'walsender'.
> > Snippet from primary db-
> >
> > datname | usename | application_name | wait_event_type | backend_type
> > ---------+-------------+------------------+-----------------+--------------
> > postgres | replication | slotsyncworker | Client | walsender
> >
> > Is it okay?
> >
>
> Slot sync worker uses 'libpqrcv_connect' for connection which sends
> 'replication'-'database' key-value pair as one of the connection
> options. And on the primary side, 'ProcessStartupPacket' on the basis
> of this key-value pair sets the process as walsender one (am_walsender
> = true).
> And thus this reflects as backend_type='walsender' in
> pg_stat_activity. I do not see any harm in this backend_type for
> slot-sync worker currently. This is on a similar line of connections
> used for logical-replications. And since a slot-sync worker also deals
> with wals-positions (lsns), it is okay to maintain backend_type as
> walsender unless you (or others) see any potential issue in doing
> that. So let me know.
>
> > ~~~
> > 3.
> > As per current logic, If there are slots on primary with disabled
> > subscriptions, then, when standby is created it replicates these slots
> > but can't make them sync-ready until any activity happens on the
> > slots.
> > So, such slots stay in 'i' sync-state and get dropped when failover
> > happens. Now, if the subscriber tries to enable their existing
> > subscription after failover, it gives an error that the slot does not
> > exist.
> >
>
> yes, this is expected as Amit explained in [1]. But let me review if
> we need to document this case for disabled subscriptions. i.e.
> disabled subscription if enabled after promotion might not work.
Sorry, missed to mention the link earlier:
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1J5Hxp%2BzhvptyyjqQ4JSQzwnkFRXtQn8v9opxtZmmY_Ug%40mail.gmail.com