Re: Why ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET (slot_name='none') requires subscription disabled? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Why ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET (slot_name='none') requires subscription disabled?
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1Lgie0A5yLyZ51a4gf6utdmXKANxo+-4LY+V8vmVY3Grw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET (slot_name='none') requires subscription disabled?  (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>)
Responses Re: Why ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET (slot_name='none') requires subscription disabled?  (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>)
Re: Why ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET (slot_name='none') requires subscription disabled?  (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 8:20 AM Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 at 18:17, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 3:43 PM Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Please consider review v3 patch. v3-0001 adds slot_name verification in
> parse_subscription_options() and comments for why we need disable subscription
> where set slot_name to NONE.
>

I think we back-patch this bug-fix till v10 where it was introduced
and update the comments only in HEAD. So, accordingly, I moved the
changes into two patches and changed the comments a bit. Can you
please test the first patch in back-branches? I'll also do it
separately.

> v3-0002 comes from Ranier Vilela, it reduce the
> overhead strlen in ReplicationSlotValidateName().
>

I think this patch has nothing to do with this bug-fix, so I suggest
you discuss this in a separate patch. Personally, I don't think it
will help in reducing any overhead but there doesn't appear to be any
harm in changing it as proposed.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Add proper planner support for ORDER BY / DISTINCT aggregates
Next
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions