Horton

Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-03-25T04:18:23Z
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 →

  1. Add a test for commit ac0e33136a using the injection point.

  2. Invalidate inactive replication slots.

  3. Fix incorrect slot type in BuildTupleHashTableExt

  4. Allow synced slots to have their inactive_since.

  5. Change last_inactive_time to inactive_since in pg_replication_slots.

  6. Track last_inactive_time in pg_replication_slots.

  7. Track invalidation_reason in pg_replication_slots.

  8. Add option force_initdb to PostgreSQL::Test::Cluster:init()

  9. Add a failover option to subscriptions.

  10. Allow setting failover property in the replication command.

  11. Allow to enable failover property for replication slots via SQL API.

  12. Track conflict_reason in pg_replication_slots.

  13. Log messages for replication slot acquisition and release.

  14. Remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age

  15. Fix corruption due to vacuum_defer_cleanup_age underflowing 64bit xids

  16. meson: Add initial version of meson based build system

On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 3:05 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 10:40 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > For instance, setting last_inactive_time_1 to an invalid value fails
> > > with the following error:
> > >
> > > error running SQL: 'psql:<stdin>:1: ERROR:  invalid input syntax for
> > > type timestamp with time zone: "foo"
> > > LINE 1: SELECT last_inactive_time > 'foo'::timestamptz FROM pg_repli...
> > >
> >
> > It would be found at a later point. It would be probably better to
> > verify immediately after the test that fetches the last_inactive_time
> > value.
>
> Agree. I've added a few more checks explicitly to verify the
> last_inactive_time is sane with the following:
>
>         qq[SELECT '$last_inactive_time'::timestamptz > to_timestamp(0)
> AND '$last_inactive_time'::timestamptz >
> '$slot_creation_time'::timestamptz;]
>

Such a test looks reasonable but shall we add equal to in the second
part of the test (like '$last_inactive_time'::timestamptz >=
> '$slot_creation_time'::timestamptz;). This is just to be sure that even if the test ran fast enough to give the same time, the test shouldn't fail. I think it won't matter for correctness as well.


-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.