RE: Correction in doc of failover ready steps

On Wednesday, July 24, 2024 10:56 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 5:10 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > One minor comment:
> > - if the table copy is finished (See <xref
> > linkend="catalog-pg-subscription-rel"/>).
> > + On the subscriber node, use the following SQL to identify which main
> > + slots should be synced to the standby that we plan to promote.
> > + This query
> >
> > Shall we refer to these slots as replication slots instead of main
> > slots in the above sentence? We don't have a main slot terminology at
> > other places, so it would be better not to introduce a new one. I know
> > that it was introduced in the original commit but it seems better to
> > change if we agree.
>
> Yes, it makes sense. Please find the patch with this change.

Thanks for the patch.

Here is one comment:

The second query has a condition 'WHERE slot_name IS NOT NULL', but I
think it belongs to the first query. Because the slot_name of second query
is built by CONCAT() which means it should be valid, while the first query's
subslotname could be NULL if user executed ALTER SUB SET (slot_name = NONE).

Apart from above, it looks good to me.

Best Regards,
Hou zj