RE: New standby_slot_names GUC in PG 17
Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
From: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Muhammad Ikram <mmikram@gmail.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Date: 2024-06-26T09:15:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v2-0001-Rename-standby_slot_names-to-synchronized_standby.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v2-0001
On Wednesday, June 26, 2024 12:49 PM Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 04:17:45AM +0000, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 26, 2024 9:40 AM Masahiko Sawada > <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 5:32 PM Amit Kapila > > > <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I feel synchronized better indicates the purpose because we ensure > > > > such slots are synchronized before we process changes for logical > > > > failover slots. We already have a 'failover' option for logical > > > > slots which could make things confusing if we add 'failover' where > > > > physical slots need to be specified. > > > > > > Agreed. So +1 for synchronized_stnadby_slots. > > > > +1. > > > > Since there is a consensus on this name, I am attaching the patch to > > rename the GUC to synchronized_stnadby_slots. I have confirmed that > > the regression tests and pgindent passed for the patch. > A few comments: Thanks for the comments! > 1 ==== > > In the commit message: > > " > The standby_slot_names GUC is intended to allow specification of physical > standby slots that must be synchronized before they are visible to > subscribers > " > > Not sure that wording is correct, if we feel the need to explain the GUC, maybe > repeat some wording from bf279ddd1c? I intentionally copied some words from release note of this GUC which was also part of the content in the initial email of this thread. I think it would be easy to understand than the original commit msg. But others may have different opinion, so I would leave the decision to the committer. (I adjusted a bit the word in this version). > > 2 ==== > > Should we rename StandbySlotNamesConfigData too? > > 3 ==== > > Should we rename SlotExistsInStandbySlotNames too? > > 4 ==== > > Should we rename validate_standby_slots() too? > Renamed these to the names suggested by Amit. Attach the v2 patch set which addressed above and removed the changes in release-17.sgml according to the comment from Amit. Best Regards, Hou zj
Commits
-
Update release notes to reflect recent commit 0f934b0739.
- 58c5f60eb8ce 17.0 landed
-
Rename standby_slot_names to synchronized_standby_slots.
- 2357c9223b71 18.0 landed
- 0f934b0739ad 17.0 landed
-
Add a new slot sync worker to synchronize logical slots.
- 93db6cbda037 17.0 cited