public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
To: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: pgsql: Add ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SKIP.
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 23:10:04 +0900
Message-ID: <CAD21AoDKLPA6tWqYCpBz3quKARmaMfQ_bM_oH6Erdsbou_O0aw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1+=bifvdFw+36pV5Q1LGfdV5seUvVkd+JwaQ+U3G+dBqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAA4eK1+=bifvdFw+36pV5Q1LGfdV5seUvVkd+JwaQ+U3G+dBqg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 8:39 PM Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 1:48 PM Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 2022-Mar-22, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > Add ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SKIP.
> >
> > There are two messages here that seem oddly worded.
> >
> > msgid "start skipping logical replication transaction finished at %X/%X"
> > msgid "done skipping logical replication transaction finished at %X/%X"
> >
> > Two complaints here.  First, the phrases "start / finished" and "done /
> > finished" look very strange.  It took me a while to realize that
> > "finished" refers to the LSN, not to the skipping operation.  Do we ever
> > talk about a transaction "finished at XYZ" as opposed to a transaction
> > whose LSN is XYZ?  (This became particularly strange when I realized
> > that the LSN might come from a PREPARE.)
> >
>
> The reason to add "finished at ..." was to be explicit about whether
> it is a starting LSN or an end LSN of a transaction. We do have such
> differentiation in ReorderBufferTXN (first_lsn ... end_lsn).
>
> > Second, "logical replication transaction".  Is it not a regular
> > transaction that we happen to be processing via logical replication?
> >
> > I think they should say something like
> >
> > "logical replication starts skipping transaction with LSN %X/%X"
> > "logical replication completed skipping transaction with LSN %X/%X"
> >
>
> This looks better to me.

+1

> If you find the above argument to
> differentiate between the start and end LSN convincing then we can
> think of replacing "with" in the above messages with "finished at". I
> see your point related to using "finished at" for PREPARE may not be a
> good idea but I don't have better ideas for the same.

Given that the user normally doesn't need to be aware of the
difference between start LSN and end LSN in the context of using this
feature, I think we can use "with LSN %X/%X".

Regards,

-- 
Masahiko Sawada

view thread (9+ 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], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: pgsql: Add ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SKIP.
  In-Reply-To: <CAD21AoDKLPA6tWqYCpBz3quKARmaMfQ_bM_oH6Erdsbou_O0aw@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