Re: Unexpected behavior when setting "idle_replication_slot_timeout"
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unexpected behavior when setting "idle_replication_slot_timeout" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 472687.1751731008@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Unexpected behavior when setting "idle_replication_slot_timeout" ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes: > On Saturday, July 5, 2025, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >> Do you see any serious downside to switching the unit to seconds? I don't >> think it introduces any serious issues. On the contrary, it gives users >> finer >> control over the timeout, and additionally works around the issue >> that we're discussing here. > I do not, and would rather we make the change. Minutes are an > unconventional base unit for time in our world and should be avoided. By my count, there are ten GUCs declared with GUC_UNIT_S and three with GUC_UNIT_MIN. I'd say that there may be some lean towards seconds but David's argument seems like pure hyperbole. I'm kind of down on changing the unit, because it will *silently* break configuration files where the value was set without a unit. May I suggest an alternative? We could change the variable from int to float type and continue to specify it in minutes. That will have exactly zero compatibility impact, it allows sub-minute values to be selected at need, and it removes the need for hair-splitting documentation about what the rounding rules are. We previously did the same with vacuum_cost_delay to avoid worries about how to specify sub-millisecond precision for that. So the infrastructure is already in place, I think. The patch will be different from what is proposed but should need to touch pretty much the same places. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: