On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 12:11 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hay...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Dear Amit, > > > I also don't see the need for this mechanism for logical replication, > > and in fact, why do we need to even wait for sending the existing WAL? > > Is it meant that logicalrep walsenders do not have to track WalSndCaughtUp and > any pending data in the output buffer? >
I haven't checked the details but I think what you are saying is correct. > > > Another related point to consider is what is the behavior of > > synchronous replication when shutdown has been performed both in the > > case of physical and logical replication especially when the > > time-delayed replication feature is enabled? > > In physical replication without any failures, it seems that users can stop > primary > server even if the applications are delaying on secondary. This is because > sent WALs > are immediately flushed on secondary and walreceiver replies its position. > What happens when synchronous_commit's value is remote_apply and the user has also set synchronous_standby_names to corresponding standby? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
