Horton

Re: Implement waiting for wal lsn replay: reloaded

Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>, Yura Sokolov <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>
Date: 2026-05-26T01:48:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 5:00 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2026 at 9:40 PM Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I agree with you.  But do we actually need a
> >> > wait_for_standby_and_slot_catchup() wrapper.  I think we can call
> >> > $node->wait_for_slot_catchup() directly and simplify the fix.  Check
> >> > the attached patch.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The patch looks good to me. I agree that the wait_for_slot_catchup is
> >> not needed and could be misleading. This change would make the exact
> >> synchronization point and its intention clearer. The only price we
> >> need to pay here is bringing back the polling. But it seems acceptable
> >> since the cost was there in the pre-wait-for-lsn era. And thanks for
> >> writing the great commit message!
> >
> >
> > Sorry for copy-pasting the wrong function name. It should be wait_for_catchup().
>
> Good, thank you.  I'll push it if no objections.

While reading 019_replslot_limit.pl, Codex pointed out a few
inconsistencies in the comments. I verified them and they look real.
Would you mind doing a small cleanup as well?

-- 
Regards,
Xuneng Zhou
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.