On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:27 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 9:00 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > If so, I agree > > with you, we don't need XIDs of other databases as logical WALSender > > will anyway won't process transactions in other databases, so we can > > exclude those. The function GetOldestActiveTransactionId() is called > > from two places in patch get_candidate_xid() and > > ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage(). We don't need to care for XIDs in > > other databases at both places but care for > > Commit_Critical_Section_Phase when called from > > ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage(). So, we probably need two parameters > > to distinguish those cases. > > Why do we need to include all XIDs even in the cases called from > ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage()? >
No, we don't need all XIDs even in the case of ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage(). That is what I wrote: "The function GetOldestActiveTransactionId() is called from two places in patch get_candidate_xid() and ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage(). We don't need to care for XIDs in other databases at both places ...". Am I missing something or you misread it? > I guess that there is no chance that > the changes happening on other (non-subscribed) databases could > conflict with something on the subscriber. > Right. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
