On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> So the only way to fulfill the requirement you stated is to just not try
>> to drop the slot, ever, on DROP SUBSCRIPTION. That makes the default
>> behavior leave resources on upstream that will eventually cause that
>> server to stop unless user notices before. I think we better invent
>> something that limits how much inactive slots can hold back WAL and
>> catalog_xmin in this release as well then.
> I don't understand why isn't the default behavior to unconditionally
> drop the slot.  Why do we ever want the slot to be kept?

What if the remote server doesn't exist any more?

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to