Re: Implement waiting for wal lsn replay: reloaded

Hi, Xuneng!

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 6:54 PM Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did a rebase for the patch to v8 and incorporated a few changes:
>
> 1) Updated documentation, added new tests, and applied minor code
> adjustments based on prior review comments.
> 2) Tweaked the initialization of waitReplayLSNState so that
> non-backend processes can call wait for replay.
>
> Started a new thread [1] and attached a patch addressing the polling
> issue in the function
> read_local_xlog_page_guts built on the infra of patch v8.
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7Vr99gZ5GM_ZYbYnd9MMnoVW3pukBEviVoHKRvJW-dE3g@mail.gmail.com
>
> Feedbacks welcome.

Thank you for your reviewing and revising this patch.

I see you've integrated most of your points expressed in [1].  I went
though them and I've integrated the rest of them.  Except this one.

> 11) The synopsis might read more clearly as:
> - WAIT FOR LSN '<lsn>' [ TIMEOUT <milliseconds | 'duration-with-units'> ] [ NO_THROW ]

I didn't find examples on how we do the similar things on other places
of docs.  This is why I decided to leave this place as it currently
is.

Also, I found some mess up with typedefs.list.  I've returned the
changes to typdefs.list back and re-indented the sources.

I'd like to ask your opinion of the way this feature is implemented in
terms of grammar: generic parsing implemented in gram.y and the rest
is done in wait.c.  I think this approach should minimize additional
keywords and states for parsing code.  This comes at the price of more
complex code in wait.c, but I think this is a fair price.

Links.
1. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7VsoGDMBq34MpLrMSZyxNZvVbgH6-zxtJOg5AwOoYURbw%40mail.gmail.com

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase