Re: pgsql: Track last_inactive_time in pg_replication_slots.
shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
From: shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <akapila@postgresql.org>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Date: 2024-03-26T04:25:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 1:50 AM Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 1:30 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 04:49:12PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 12:25:37PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > >> In the same vein, I think deactivated_at or inactive_since might be > > >> good names to consider. I think they get at the same thing as > > >> released_time, but they avoid introducing a completely new word > > >> (release, as opposed to active/inactive). > > > > > > Yeah, I'd vote for inactive_since then. > > > > Having only skimmed some of the related discussions, I'm inclined to agree > > that inactive_since provides the clearest description for the column. > > I think we all have some agreement on inactive_since. So, I'm > attaching the patch for that change. pg_proc.dat needs to be changed to refer to 'inactive_since' instead of 'last_inactive_time' in the attached patch. thanks Shveta
Commits
-
Allow synced slots to have their inactive_since.
- 6f132ed693b6 17.0 landed
-
Change last_inactive_time to inactive_since in pg_replication_slots.
- 6d49c8d4b4f4 17.0 landed
-
Track last_inactive_time in pg_replication_slots.
- a11f330b5584 17.0 cited
-
Remove vacuum_defer_cleanup_age
- 1118cd37eb61 16.0 cited