Re: Replication slot stats misgivings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Masahiko Sawada
Subject Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoC5oNtu_02m9Tk49Bq==PqbQO3WOKPWNoR=aZG7SpZX8A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Replication slot stats misgivings  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 3:22 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:52 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> I have made minor changes to the 0001 and 0002 patches. Attached is
> the combined patch for them, I think we can push them as one patch.
> Changes made are (a) minor editing in comments, (b) changed the
> condition when to report stats such that unless we have processed any
> bytes, we shouldn't send those, (c) removed some unrelated changes
> from 0002, (d) ran pgindent.
>
> Let me know what you think of the attached?

Thank you for updating the patch.

I have one question on the doc change:

+        so the counter is not incremented for subtransactions. Note that this
+        includes the transactions streamed and or spilled.
+       </para></entry>

The patch uses the sentence "streamed and or spilled" in two places.
You meant “streamed and spilled”? Even if it actually means “and or”,
using "and or” (i.g., connecting “and” to “or” by a space) is general?
I could not find we use it other places in the doc but found we're
using "and/or" instead.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB:  https://www.enterprisedb.com/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
Next
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Problems around compute_query_id