Re: pgsql: Track last_inactive_time in pg_replication_slots.
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>,
shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
Amit Kapila <akapila@postgresql.org>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-03-26T07:39:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2024-Mar-26, Amit Kapila wrote:
> We have a consensus on inactive_since, so I'll make that change.
Sounds reasonable. So this is a timestamptz if the slot is inactive,
NULL if active, right? What value is it going to have for sync slots?
> I would also like to solicit your opinion on the other slot-level
> parameter we are planning to introduce. This new slot-level parameter
> will be named as inactive_timeout.
Maybe inactivity_timeout?
> This will indicate that once the slot is inactive for the
> inactive_timeout period, we will invalidate the slot. We are also
> discussing to have this parameter (inactive_timeout) as GUC [1]. We
> can have this new parameter both at the slot level and as well as a
> GUC, or just one of those.
replication_slot_inactivity_timeout?
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Tom: There seems to be something broken here.
Teodor: I'm in sackcloth and ashes... Fixed.
http://postgr.es/m/482D1632.8010507@sigaev.ru
Commits
-
Allow synced slots to have their inactive_since.
- 6f132ed693b6 17.0 landed
-
Change last_inactive_time to inactive_since in pg_replication_slots.
- 6d49c8d4b4f4 17.0 landed
-
Track last_inactive_time in pg_replication_slots.
- a11f330b5584 17.0 cited
-
Remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age
- 1118cd37eb61 16.0 cited