public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
To: David G. Johnston <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Logical Replication upgrade
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 10:43:52 +0530
Message-ID: <CAA4eK1+dR-sEGM+oC7H_-7PrBJBcdM2o5-eS6JrkMBJ0FOA54Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKFQuwbHjB6EEdp6mmaUt4bCTYrYUdvEr44vVqhdT0OD4Z+3Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAKFQuwZ86BE49-gzFunuu=u1ieT+T6q900=1Cx=vuO9Aqv9kcg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA4eK1LR_MjZuV31r-MOqno9-Kr0mA9zas2cxZtE=+X3RUYXbw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKFQuwbHjB6EEdp6mmaUt4bCTYrYUdvEr44vVqhdT0OD4Z+3Qg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 8:59 AM David G. Johnston
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, April 15, 2026, Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 9:25 PM David G. Johnston
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 7:52 AM PG Doc comments form <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>> >>
>> >> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/logical-replication-upgrade.html
>> >> Description:
>> >>
>> >> Hello there,
>> >>
>> >> I don't know if it's me but I find this sentence quite confusing in its
>> >> current wording:
>> >> All slots on the old cluster must be usable, i.e., there are no slots whose
>> >> pg_replication_slots.conflicting is not true.
>> >>
>> >> The prerequisite is that no replication slot has conflicting=true right?
>> >> So this sentence (the i.e. part) suggests the opposite, as per my
>> >> understanding.
>> >>
>> >> Here is the link (29.13.1):
>> >> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/logical-replication-upgrade.html#STEPS-TWO-NODE-CIRCULAR-LOG...
>> >>
>> >
>> > You are correct. Usage of a double-negative should be avoided as a matter of style, but in this case it actually resolves to an untrue statement.
>> >
>> > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/7fdeaf5774d05245e82632e763665ff62db5598e
>> >
>> > I've copied the committer for this. Removing the "not" is simple enough; though writing in the negative sense,
>> >
>>
>> How about: "All slots on the old cluster must be usable, i.e., there
>> are no slots whose pg_replication_slots.conflicting is false."?
>
>
> That is the same backwards outcome. You only replaced “not true” with “false” (same meaning) but didn’t change the “no slots” phrasing.
>
Right, I got confused.
> You can write either?
>
> No slots are true (conflicting)
> All slots are false (not conflicting)
>
> I prefer the second, and the fact your attempted fix didn’t actually fix things suggests that rephrasing both of these to “all slots are” is better.
>
So, how about: "All slots on the old cluster must be usable, i.e.,
their pg_replication_slots.conflicting is false."?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
view thread (10+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Logical Replication upgrade
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1+dR-sEGM+oC7H_-7PrBJBcdM2o5-eS6JrkMBJ0FOA54Q@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox