Re: pgsql: Track last_inactive_time in pg_replication_slots.

On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 1:50 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 1:30 AM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 04:49:12PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 12:25:37PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > >> In the same vein, I think deactivated_at or inactive_since might be
> > >> good names to consider. I think they get at the same thing as
> > >> released_time, but they avoid introducing a completely new word
> > >> (release, as opposed to active/inactive).
> > >
> > > Yeah, I'd vote for inactive_since then.
> >
> > Having only skimmed some of the related discussions, I'm inclined to agree
> > that inactive_since provides the clearest description for the column.
>
> I think we all have some agreement on inactive_since. So, I'm
> attaching the patch for that change.

pg_proc.dat needs to be changed to refer to 'inactive_since' instead
of 'last_inactive_time' in the attached patch.

thanks
Shveta