On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 5:23 PM Ashutosh Sharma <[email protected]> wrote: > > > PFA patch addressing all the comments above and let me know for any > further comments. >
Thank You Ashutosh. Doc looks good to me. Few comments: 1) slot_states[num_slot_states].slot_name = name; slot_states[num_slot_states].state = inactive ? SS_SLOT_INACTIVE_LAGGING : SS_SLOT_ACTIVE_LAGGING; if (!inactive) slot_states[num_slot_states].restart_lsn = restart_lsn; num_slot_states++; Just to simplify the above part, I think we can set restart_lsn irrespective of 'inactive', no harm in that. Feel free to ignore this comment if you like the current way. slot_states[num_slot_states].slot_name = name; slot_states[num_slot_states].restart_lsn = restart_lsn; slot_states[num_slot_states].state = inactive ? SS_SLOT_INACTIVE_LAGGING : SS_SLOT_ACTIVE_LAGGING; num_slot_states++; 2) Test case mentioned scenarios A,B,C in test header, we can either mention all there or none. 3) What is the execution time for this new test? I ran it on my VM (which is slightly on the slower side), and the runtime varies between ~60 seconds and ~140 seconds. I executed it around 10–15 times. Most runs completed in about 65 seconds (which is still more), but a few were significantly longer (100+ seconds). During the longer runs, I noticed the following entry in pub.log (possibly related to Test Scenario E taking more time?). Could you please try running this on your end as well? 2026-03-31 19:45:45.557 IST client backend[145705] 053_synchronized_standby_slots_quorum.pl LOG: statement: SELECT active_pid IS NOT NULL AND restart_lsn IS NOT NULL AND restart_lsn < '0/03000450'::pg_lsn FROM pg_replication_slots WHERE slot_name = 'sb1_slot'; Just for reference, the complete failover test (t/040_standby_failover_slots_sync.pl) takes somewhere between 7 to 10sec on my VM. thanks Shveta
