Horton

Re: Non-reserved replication slots and slot advancing

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Date: 2018-07-03T17:23:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2018-Jul-03, Andres Freund wrote:

> I'm not clear to why this is a problem? Seems like either behaviour can
> be argued for. I don't really have an opinion either way. I'd just
> remove the item from the open items list, I don't think we need to hold
> up the release for it?

After reading this more carefully, isn't the problem that as soon as you
get a slot into the 0/1 restart_lsn state, WAL recycling/deletion no
longer happens?  That does sound like a bad thing to me.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Block replication slot advance for these not yet reserving WAL