From: | "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Amit Kapila" <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Masahiko Sawada" <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "vignesh C" <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Greg Nancarrow" <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Alexey Lesovsky" <lesovsky(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
Date: | 2022-03-21 01:39:25 |
Message-ID: | c092b93b-5017-4b31-b8f0-53b0ba7995be@www.fastmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022, at 3:03 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:53 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I've attached an updated version patch.
> >
>
> The patch LGTM. I have made minor changes in comments and docs in the
> attached patch. Kindly let me know what you think of the attached?
>
> I am planning to commit this early next week (on Monday) unless there
> are more comments/suggestions.
I reviewed this last version and I have a few comments.
+ * If the user set subskiplsn, we do a sanity check to make
+ * sure that the specified LSN is a probable value.
... user *sets*...
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
+ errmsg("skip WAL location (LSN) must be greater than origin LSN %X/%X",
+ LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(remote_lsn))));
Shouldn't we add the LSN to be skipped in the "(LSN)"?
+ * Start a new transaction to clear the subskipxid, if not started
+ * yet.
It seems it means subskiplsn.
+ * subskipxid in order to inform users for cases e.g., where the user mistakenly
+ * specified the wrong subskiplsn.
It seems it means subskiplsn.
+sub test_skip_xact
+{
It seems this function should be named test_skip_lsn. Unless the intention is
to cover other skip options in the future.
src/test/subscription/t/029_disable_on_error.pl | 94 ----------
src/test/subscription/t/029_on_error.pl | 183 +++++++++++++++++++
It seems you are removing a test for 705e20f8550c0e8e47c0b6b20b5f5ffd6ffd9e33.
I should also name 029_on_error.pl to something else such as 030_skip_lsn.pl or
a generic name 030_skip_option.pl.
--
Euler Taveira
EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2022-03-21 01:44:55 | Re: Probable CF bot degradation |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-03-21 01:38:44 | Re: refactoring basebackup.c (zstd workers) |