Horton

Re: Improve pg_sync_replication_slots() to wait for primary to advance

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-10-09T08:43:48Z
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. Enhance slot synchronization API to respect promotion signal.

  2. Fix inconsistent elevel in pg_sync_replication_slots() retry logic.

  3. Refactor slot synchronization logic in slotsync.c.

  4. Fix intermittent BF failure in 040_standby_failover_slots_sync.

  5. Add retry logic to pg_sync_replication_slots().

  6. Fix LOCK_TIMEOUT handling in slotsync worker.

  7. Add slotsync skip statistics.

On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 5:13 PM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 4:49 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Shorter nap times mean higher possibility of wasted CPU cycles - that
> > should be avoided. Doing that for a test's sake seems wrong. Is there
> > a way that the naptime can controlled by external factors such as
> > likelihood of an advanced slot (just firing bullets in the dark) or is
> > the naptime controllable by user interface like GUC? The test can use
> > those interfaces.
> >
>
> Yes, we can control naptime based on the fact whether any slots are
> being advanced on primary. This is how a slotsync worker does. It
> keeps on doubling the naptime if there is no activity on primary
> starting from 200ms till max of 30 sec. As soon as activity happens,
> naptime is reduced to 200ms again.
>

Is there a reason why we don't want to use the same naptime strategy
for API and worker?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.