Re: pg_create_logical_replication_slot argument incongruency - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Florin Irion
Subject Re: pg_create_logical_replication_slot argument incongruency
Date
Msg-id 5eeabd10-1aff-ea61-f92d-9fa0d9a7e207@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_create_logical_replication_slot argument incongruency  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: pg_create_logical_replication_slot argument incongruency
List pgsql-hackers

On 20/09/22 03:33, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 07:02:16PM +0200, Florin Irion wrote:
>> This was introduced in commit 19890a06.
>>
>> IMHO we should use the documented argument name `two_phase` and change the
>> function to accept it.
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> 19890a0 is included in REL_14_STABLE, and changing an argument name is
> not acceptable in a stable branch as it would imply a catversion
> bump.  Let's change the docs so as we document the parameter as
> "twophase", instead.
> --
> Michael

I understand. 

OK, patch only for the docs attached.

Cheers, 
Florin
www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: missing indexes in indexlist with partitioned tables
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Add common function ReplicationOriginName.