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

On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:28 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 9:48 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Such a test looks reasonable but shall we add equal to in the second
> > part of the test (like '$last_inactive_time'::timestamptz >=
> > > '$slot_creation_time'::timestamptz;). This is just to be sure that even if the test ran fast enough to give the
sametime, the test shouldn't fail. I think it won't matter for correctness as well. 

Agree. I added that in v19 patch. I was having that concern in my
mind. That's the reason I wasn't capturing current_time something like
below for the same worry that current_timestamp might be the same (or
nearly the same) as the slot creation time. That's why I ended up
capturing current_timestamp in a separate query than clubbing it up
with pg_create_physical_replication_slot.

SELECT current_timestamp FROM pg_create_physical_replication_slot('foo');

> Apart from this, I have made minor changes in the comments. See and
> let me know what you think of attached.

LGTM. I've merged the diff into v19 patch.

Please find the attached v19 patch.

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