Re: New standby_slot_names GUC in PG 17
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Muhammad Ikram <mmikram@gmail.com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-06-21T19:50:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Muhammad Ikram <mmikram@gmail.com> writes: > A humble input, as on primary we have #primary_slot_name = '' then should > not it be okay to have standby_slot_names or standby_slot_name ? It seems > consistent with the Guc on primary. > Another suggestion is *standby_replication_slots*. IIUC, Bruce's complaint is that the name is too generic (which I agree with). Given the stated functionality: >>>> Allow specification of physical standbys that must be synchronized >>>> before they are visible to subscribers (Hou Zhijie, Shveta Malik) it seems like the name ought to have some connection to synchronization. Perhaps something like "synchronized_standby_slots"? I haven't read the patch, so I don't know if this name is especially on-point. But "standby_slot_names" seems completely unhelpful, as a server could well have slots that are for standbys but are not to be included in this list. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Update release notes to reflect recent commit 0f934b0739.
- 58c5f60eb8ce 17.0 landed
-
Rename standby_slot_names to synchronized_standby_slots.
- 2357c9223b71 18.0 landed
- 0f934b0739ad 17.0 landed
-
Add a new slot sync worker to synchronize logical slots.
- 93db6cbda037 17.0 cited