| From: | "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Masahiko Sawada' <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: Add the replication origin name and commit-LSN to logical replication worker errcontext |
| Date: | 2022-03-04 06:15:49 |
| Message-ID: | TYCPR01MB8373F2760DA331F1B401A42AED059@TYCPR01MB8373.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday, March 4, 2022 2:23 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I've attached updated patches.
Hi, thank you for updating the patch.
One comment on v4.
In v4-0002, we introduce 'commit_lsn' in the ApplyErrorCallbackArg.
This member is set for prepare, rollback prepared and stream_abort as well.
The new log message format is useful when we have a prepare transaction
that keeps failing on the subscriber and want to know the target transaction
for the pg_replication_origin_advance(), right ?
If this is true, I wasn't sure if the name 'commit_lsn' is the
most accurate name for this variable. Should we adjust the name a bit ?
Even when we decide to continue to use 'commit_lsn',
it might be better to add some comments near the definition, I feel.
Best Regards,
Takamichi Osumi
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com | 2022-03-04 06:17:26 | RE: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-03-04 06:05:35 | Re: Doc about how to set max_wal_senders when setting minimal wal_level |