Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Smith
Subject Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Date
Msg-id CAHut+Pvj4t7mQ9hM32PYbRFKPnKzGir6hQ3Zw3_7xQ-BL5=vxQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation  (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 5:52 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 at 15:57, Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 2, 2025 at 8:16 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Nisha,
> > >
> > > Here are some minor review comments for patch v58-0002.
> > >
...
>
> 2) We can mention this as 1d  instead of 24h as we want to represent 1
> day similar to how we have mentioned for log_rotation_age:
> index a2ac7575ca..7284edfbc1 100644
> --- a/src/backend/utils/misc/postgresql.conf.sample
> +++ b/src/backend/utils/misc/postgresql.conf.sample
> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@
>  #wal_sender_timeout = 60s      # in milliseconds; 0 disables
>  #track_commit_timestamp = off  # collect timestamp of transaction commit
>                                 # (change requires restart)
> +#idle_replication_slot_timeout = 24h   # in minutes; 0 disables
>

Hi Vignesh. AFAIK that is due to a previous review comment of mine
where I suggested we should use 24h format here, because this GUC
default is described as "24 hours" in the config.sgml, and I felt the
sample should match its own documentation.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Next
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Documentation update of wal_retrieve_retry_interval to mention table sync worker