On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 12:12 PM Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 11:05 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yes, all good suggestions, updated patch attached.
> >
>
> Few comments for the changes under "inactive_since" description:
>
> + The time when slot synchronization (see <xref
> + linkend="logicaldecoding-replication-slots-synchronization"/>)
> + was most recently stopped. <literal>NULL</literal> if the slot
> + has always been synchronized. This is useful for slots on the
> + standby that are being synced from a primary server (whose
> + <structfield>synced</structfield> field is <literal>true</literal>)
> + so they know when the slot stopped being synchronized.
>
> 1)
> To me, the above lines give the impression that "inactive_since" is
> only meaningful for the logical slots which are being synchronized
> from primary to standby, which is not correct. On a primary node, this
> column gives the timestamp when any slot becomes inactive. By removing
> the line -
> - The time since the slot has become inactive.
> I feel we lost the description that explains this column’s purpose on
> primary nodes. I suggest explicitly clarifying the inactive_since
> column's meaning on primary nodes as well.
>
Good point. The same holds true for following change in the patch as well:
- /* The time since the slot has become inactive */
+ /* The time when slot synchronization was most recently stopped. */
TimestampTz inactive_since;
Do you have suggestions for improving the proposal?
> 2) Can we add more details to it for column's behavior on restarting
> a node, something like -
> "For the inactive slots, restarting a node resets the "inactive_since"
> time to the node's start time. "
>
I am not so sure about this. Adding too-long descriptions also
sometimes confuses users.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
