Hi, On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 10:42:20PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 4:49 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > You might want to consider its interaction with sync slots on standby. > > Say, there is no activity on slots in terms of processing the changes > > for slots. Now, we won't perform sync of such slots on standby showing > > them inactive as per your new criteria where as same slots could still > > be valid on primary as the walsender is still active. This may be more > > of a theoretical point as in running system there will probably be > > some activity but I think this needs some thougths. > > I believe the xmin and catalog_xmin of the sync slots on the standby > keep advancing depending on the slots on the primary, no? If yes, the > XID age based invalidation shouldn't be a problem. > > I believe there are no walsenders started for the sync slots on the > standbys, right? If yes, the inactive timeout based invalidation also > shouldn't be a problem. Because, the inactive timeouts for a slot are > tracked only for walsenders because they are the ones that typically > hold replication slots for longer durations and for real replication > use. We did a similar thing in a recent commit [1]. > > Is my understanding right? Do you still see any problems with it?
Would that make sense to "simply" discard/prevent those kind of invalidations for "synced" slot on standby? I mean, do they make sense given the fact that those slots are not usable until the standby is promoted? Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
