Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view
От | Kyotaro Horiguchi |
---|---|
Тема | Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200619.215329.1424954031276582751.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: min_safe_lsn column in pg_replication_slots view (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
At Fri, 19 Jun 2020 21:15:52 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 05:34:01PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > > On 2020/06/19 16:43, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > >> At Fri, 19 Jun 2020 16:36:09 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote in > >>> So we usually avoid to do that between betas, but my take here is that > >>> a catalog bump is better than regretting a change we may have to live > >>> with after the release is sealed. > > > > Sounds reasonable. > > If we want to make this happen, I am afraid that the time is short as > beta2 is planned for next week. As the version will be likely tagged > by Monday US time, it would be good to get this addressed within 48 > hours to give some room to the buildfarm to react. Attached is a > straight-forward proposal of patch. Any thoughts? > > (The change in catversion.h is a self-reminder.) Thanks for the patch. As a whole it contains all needed for ripping off the min_safe_lsn. Some items in the TAP test gets coarse but none of them lose significance. Compiles almost cleanly and passes all tests including TAP test. The variable last_removed_seg in slotfuncs.c:285 is left alone but no longer used after applying this patch. It should be removed as well. Other than that the patch looks good to me. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: