On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 2:36 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 4:53 PM shveta malik <shveta.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > PFA v43, changes are: > > > > I wanted to discuss 0003 patch about cascading standby's. It is not > clear to me whether we want to allow physical standbys to further wait > for cascading standby to sync their slots. If we allow such a feature > one may expect even primary to wait for all the cascading standby's > because otherwise still logical subscriber can be ahead of one of the > cascading standby. I feel even if we want to allow such a behaviour we > can do it later once the main feature is committed. I think it would > be good to just allow logical walsenders on primary to wait for > physical standbys represented by GUC 'standby_slot_names'. If we agree > on that then it would be good to prohibit setting this GUC on standby > or at least it should be a no-op even if this GUC should be set on > physical standby. > > Thoughts?
IMHO, why not keep the behavior consistent across primary and standby? I mean if it doesn't require a lot of new code/design addition then it should be the user's responsibility. I mean if the user has set 'standby_slot_names' on standby then let standby also wait for cascading standby to sync their slots? Is there any issue with that behavior? -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
