On Saturday, June 22, 2024 5:47 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 1:49 AM Nathan Bossart > <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 03:50:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > >>>>> Allow specification of physical standbys that must be > > >>>>> synchronized before they are visible to subscribers (Hou Zhijie, > > >>>>> Shveta Malik) > > > > > > it seems like the name ought to have some connection to > > > synchronization. Perhaps something like "synchronized_standby_slots"? > > > > IMHO that might be a bit too close to synchronous_standby_names. > > > > Right, but better than the current one. The other possibility could be > wait_for_standby_slots.
I agree the current name seems too generic and the suggested ' synchronized_standby_slots ' is better than the current one. Some other ideas could be: synchronize_slots_on_standbys: it indicates that the standbys that enabled slot sync should be listed in this GUC. logical_replication_wait_slots: it means the logical replication(logical Walsender process) will wait for these slots to advance the confirm flush lsn before proceeding. Best Regards, Hou zj
