On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 15:21, Shlok Kyal <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 at 14:23, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, November 26, 2025 2:29 PM Shlok Kyal > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I have also addressed the remaining comments and attached the updated > > > patch. > > > > Thanks for updating the patch, I have few comments: > > > > 1. > > +/* > > + * Map a SlotSyncSkipReason enum to a human-readable string > > + */ > > +static char * > > +GetSlotSyncSkipReasonName(SlotSyncSkipReason reason) > > > > Shall we add a static array to map the Enum value to the reason name > > instead of adding the following function ? > > > I think static array would be more clean and consistent with > ConflictTypeNames and SlotInvalidationCauses. > Made the changes for same. > > > 2. > > + <literal>remote_behind</literal> means that the slot is ahead of > > the > > + corresponding failover slot on the primary. > > > > I think the current naming and doc is not easy for user to understand. So, I > > suggest mentioning the explicit reason of this skip, e.g., the required > > WALs and > > rows are removed or at the risk of removal. We can rename this reason to > > "wal_or_rows_removed" and make the document similar to the content in > > logicaldecoding.sgml. > > > I agree. Included the changes for same. > > I have also addressed the comments by Shveta in [1]. > [1]: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uDKC0QubC0pL%3DbZ4Qnq3eQbykLnFu5x%3DwmDkOmL44QL7g%40mail.gmail.com
I have made some minor changes in documentation and comments. Attached the updated patch. Thanks, Shlok Kyal
v15-0001-Add-slotsync_skip_reason-to-pg_replication_slots.patch
Description: Binary data
