On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:20 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:21 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > 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. > > I feel that the name that has some connection to "logical replication" > also sounds good. Let me add some ideas: > > - logical_replication_synchronous_standby_slots (might be too long) > - logical_replication_synchronous_slots >
I see your point about keeping logical_replication in the name but that could also lead one to think that this list can contain logical slots. OTOH, there is some value in keeping '_standby_' in the name as that is more closely associated with physical standby's and this list contains physical slots corresponding to physical standby's. So, my preference is in order as follows: synchronized_standby_slots, wait_for_standby_slots, logical_replication_wait_slots, logical_replication_synchronous_slots, and logical_replication_synchronous_standby_slots. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
