Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com, smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com, vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com, kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com, shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, euler(at)eulerto(dot)com, m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)
Date: 2023-01-24 08:33:42
Message-ID: 20230124.173342.184867454318034802.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Tue, 24 Jan 2023 11:28:58 +0530, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 6:17 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > IMHO "foo > bar" is not an "option". I think we say "foo and bar are
> > mutually exclusive options" but I think don't say "foo = x and bar = y
> > are.. options". I wrote a comment as "this should be more like
> > human-speaking" and Euler seems having the same feeling for another
> > error message.
> >
> > Concretely I would spell this as "min_apply_delay cannot be enabled
> > when parallel streaming mode is enabled" or something.
> >
>
> We can change it but the current message seems to be in line with some
> nearby messages like "slot_name = NONE and enabled = true are mutually
> exclusive options". So, isn't it better to keep this as one in sync
> with existing messages?

Ooo. subscriptioncmds.c is full of such messages. Okay I agree that it
is better to leave it as is..

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2023-01-24 08:52:19 Re: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)
Previous Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2023-01-24 08:25:38 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)