| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alexey Lesovsky <lesovsky(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
| Date: | 2021-08-16 05:21:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KVryBVTq_CrMcJeGKPX1D8rezdTpZteOXLnx58jAbu+A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:54 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 1:06 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Okay, but that doesn't mean using it here is bad. I am personally fine
> > with a message containing something like "... in transaction
> > id 740 with commit timestamp 2021-08-10 14:44:38.058174+05:30" but I
> > won't mind if you and or others find some other way convenient. Any
> > opinion from others?
>
> I don't have a strong opinion on this but in terms of consistency we
> often use like "transaction %u" in messages when showing XID value,
> rather than "transaction [id|ID|identifier]":
>
..
>
> Therefore, perhaps a message like "... in transaction 740 with commit
> timestamp 2021-08-10 14:44:38.058174+05:30" is better in terms of
> consistency with other messages?
>
+1.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2021-08-16 06:00:24 | Re: Added schema level support for publication. |
| Previous Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-08-16 05:05:01 | Re: .ready and .done files considered harmful |