On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 7:58 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 6:03 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 7:18 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 11:43 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > 6.
> > > @@ -1583,7 +1649,8 @@ apply_handle_insert(StringInfo s)
> > > TupleTableSlot *remoteslot;
> > > MemoryContext oldctx;
> > >
> > > - if (handle_streamed_transaction(LOGICAL_REP_MSG_INSERT, s))
> > > + if (is_skipping_changes() ||
> > >
> > > Is there a reason to keep the skip_changes check here and in other DML
> > > operations instead of at one central place in apply_dispatch?
> >
> > Since we already have the check of applying the change on the spot at
> > the beginning of the handlers I feel it's better to add
> > is_skipping_changes() to the check than add a new if statement to
> > apply_dispatch, but do you prefer to check it in one central place in
> > apply_dispatch?
> >
>
> I think either way is fine. I just wanted to know the reason, your
> current change looks okay to me.
>
> Some questions/comments
> ======================
>
Some cosmetic suggestions:
======================
1.
+# Create subscriptions. Both subscription sets disable_on_error to on
+# so that they get disabled when a conflict occurs.
+$node_subscriber->safe_psql(
+ 'postgres',
+ qq[
+CREATE SUBSCRIPTION $subname CONNECTION '$publisher_connstr'
PUBLICATION tap_pub WITH (streaming = on, two_phase = on,
disable_on_error = on);
+]);
I don't understand what you mean by 'Both subscription ...' in the
above comments.
2.
+ # Check the log indicating that successfully skipped the transaction,
How about slightly rephrasing this to: "Check the log to ensure that
the transaction is skipped...."?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
