On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 7:40 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > 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".
>
Fair enough.
Alvaro, would you like to push your proposed change? Otherwise, I am
happy to take care of this.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
