Thread

  1. Re: How can end users know the cause of LR slot sync delays?

    Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com> — 2025-11-27T03:55:23Z

    On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 15:21, Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 14:23, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
    > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > On Wednesday, November 26, 2025 2:29 PM Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > I have also addressed the remaining comments and attached the updated
    > > > patch.
    > >
    > > Thanks for updating the patch, I have few comments:
    > >
    > > 1.
    > > +/*
    > > + * Map a SlotSyncSkipReason enum to a human-readable string
    > > + */
    > > +static char *
    > > +GetSlotSyncSkipReasonName(SlotSyncSkipReason reason)
    > >
    > > Shall we add a static array to map the Enum value to the reason name
    > > instead of adding the following function ?
    > >
    > I think static array would be more clean and consistent with
    > ConflictTypeNames and SlotInvalidationCauses.
    > Made the changes for same.
    >
    > > 2.
    > > +          <literal>remote_behind</literal> means that the slot is ahead of the
    > > +          corresponding failover slot on the primary.
    > >
    > > I think the current naming and doc is not easy for user to understand. So, I
    > > suggest mentioning the explicit reason of this skip, e.g., the required WALs and
    > > rows are removed or at the risk of removal. We can rename this reason to
    > > "wal_or_rows_removed" and make the document similar to the content in
    > > logicaldecoding.sgml.
    > >
    > I agree. Included the changes for same.
    >
    > I have also addressed the comments by Shveta in [1].
    > [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uDKC0QubC0pL%3DbZ4Qnq3eQbykLnFu5x%3DwmDkOmL44QL7g%40mail.gmail.com
    
    I have made some minor changes in documentation and comments. Attached
    the updated patch.
    
    Thanks,
    Shlok Kyal