Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker?

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 8:32 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 12:02 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Here are my feedback comments for the V29 patch.
> >
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > 3.
> > Previously the tablesync origin name format was encapsulated in a
> > common function. IMO it was cleaner/safer how it was before, instead
> > of the same "pg_%u_%u" cut/paste and scattered in many places.
> > (same comment applies multiple places, in this file and in tablesync.c)

OK. I confirmed it is fixed in V30.

But I noticed that the new function name is not quite consistent with
existing function for slot name. e.g.
ReplicationSlotNameForTablesync versus
ReplicationOriginNameForTableSync (see "TableSync" instead of
"Tablesync")

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia