Horton

Re: Exit walsender before confirming remote flush in logical replication

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com, smithpb2250@gmail.com, osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, sawada.mshk@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com, dilipbalaut@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de
Date: 2023-02-13T02:57:01Z
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 wal_sender_shutdown_timeout GUC to limit shutdown wait for replication

  2. pg_upgrade: Add --copy option

  3. Prevent possibility of panics during shutdown checkpoint.

  4. Support clean switchover.

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 7:26 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:40:43 +0000, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote in
> > Dear Amit,
> >
> > > Can't we have this option just as a bool (like shutdown_immediate)?
> > > Why do we want to keep multiple modes?
> >
> > Of course we can use boolean instead, but current style is motivated by the post[1].
> > This allows to add another option in future, whereas I do not have idea now.
> >
> > I want to ask other reviewers which one is better...
> >
> > [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20230208.112717.1140830361804418505.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com
>
> IMHO I vaguely don't like that we lose a means to specify the default
> behavior here. And I'm not sure we definitely don't need other than
> flush and immedaite for both physical and logical replication.
>

If we can think of any use case that requires its extension then it
makes sense to make it a non-boolean option but otherwise, let's keep
things simple by having a boolean option.

> If it's
> not the case, I don't object to make it a Boolean.
>

Thanks.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.