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

Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>

From: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-03-06T09:16:57Z
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

Attachments

On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 2:42 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 01:44:43PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 12:50:38AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 2:11 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> > > <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 03:44:34PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > >> > Unless I am misinterpreting some details, ISTM we could rename this column
> > >> > to invalidation_reason and use it for both logical and physical slots.  I'm
> > >> > not seeing a strong need for another column.
> > >>
> > >> Yeah having two columns was more for convenience purpose. Without the "conflict"
> > >> one, a slot conflicting with recovery would be "a logical slot having a non NULL
> > >> invalidation_reason".
> > >>
> > >> I'm also fine with one column if most of you prefer that way.
> > >
> > > While we debate on the above, please find the attached v7 patch set
> > > after rebasing.
> >
> > It looks like Bertrand is okay with reusing the same column for both
> > logical and physical slots
>
> Yeah, I'm okay with one column.

Thanks. v8-0001 is how it looks. Please see the v8 patch set with this change.

-- 
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com