Re: issue with synchronized_standby_slots
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Kukushkin <cyberdemn@gmail.com>
Cc: Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>,
Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com>, Fabrice Chapuis <fabrice636861@gmail.com>,
"Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-09-11T03:50:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix GUC check_hook validation for synchronized_standby_slots.
- e0dc4bbfb885 19 (unreleased) landed
- b45a8d7d8b30 18.1 landed
- 0024f5a1022e 17.7 landed
-
Make invalid primary_slot_name follow standard GUC error reporting.
- f33e60a53a9c 19 (unreleased) cited
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 9:02 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 5:23 PM Alexander Kukushkin <cyberdemn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 10 Sept 2025 at 13:34, Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I think we should also add a parsing check for slot names specified in > >> the GUC synchronize_standby_slots as suggested by Amit in [1]. > >> I made the changes in the above for the same and attached the updated patch. > > > > > > I agree, validating that list contains valid replication slot names is a good idea. > > However, you used ReplicationSlotValidateName() function, which is not a good fit for it, especially when it is called with elevel=ERROR in postmaster. > > > > Can you please explain why you think so? And what is your proposal for the same? > You are right and I think we should use WARNING here as is used in check_primary_slot_name() for the same function call. For ERROR reporting, we need to use GUC_check_* functions. Also, probably the ERROR during startup could lead to shutdown. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.