On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:40 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 5:13 PM shveta malik <shveta.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 1:22 PM Drouvot, Bertrand > > <bertranddrouvot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > I'd prefer to completely prohibit it on standby (to make it very clear > > > it's not > > > working at all) as long as one can enable it without downtime once the > > > standby > > > is promoted (which is the case currently). > > > > And I think slot-sync worker should exit as well on cascading standby. > > Thoughts? > > > > I think one has set all the valid parameters for the slot-sync worker > on standby, we should not exit, rather it should be no-op which means > it should not try to sync slots from another standby. One scenario > where this may help is when users promote the standby which has > already synced slots from the primary. In this case, cascading standby > will become non-cascading and should sync slots. >
Right, then perhaps we should increase naptime in this no-op case. It could be even more then current inactivity naptime which is just 10sec. Shall it be say 5min in this case? thanks Shveta
