From: | Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Shubham Khanna <khannashubham1197(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Adding a '--clean-publisher-objects' option to 'pg_createsubscriber' utility. |
Date: | 2025-02-05 05:22:41 |
Message-ID: | CANhcyEVvEn53RcCgFhqzzZatenSVTs44bZVTou87WAq2bbwM9A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 at 07:49, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
<kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Dear Shlok,
>
> > 4. Instead of warning we should throw an error here:
> > + if (PQresultStatus(res) != PGRES_TUPLES_OK)
> > + {
> > + pg_log_warning("could not obtain publication information: %s",
> > + PQresultErrorMessage(res));
> > +
>
> I don't think so. ERROR evokes user to retry the command or recreate the physical
> replica, but the conversion has already been finished when drop_all_publications()
> is called. Cleanup operations should not affect the final result.
> drop_primary_replication_slot() and drop_failover_replication_slots() raise WARNING
> when they fail to drop objects because they are just cleanup functions.
> I feel we can follow this manner.
>
Hi Kuroda-san,
I agree with you. Raising WARNING makes sense to me.
Thanks and Regards,
Shlok Kyal
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2025-02-05 05:24:09 | Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-02-05 05:10:15 | Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations |