On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 9:03 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Dilip.
>
> Here are a couple of review comments for v6-0001.
>
> ======
> GENERAL.
>
> 1.
> Firstly, here is one of my "what if" ideas...
>
> The current patch is described as making a "structured, queryable
> record of all logical replication conflicts".
>
> What if we go bigger than that? What if this were made a more generic
> "structured, queryable record of logical replication activity"?
>
> AFAIK, there don't have to be too many logic changes to achieve this.
> e.g. I'm imagining it is mostly:
>
> * Rename the subscription parameter "conflict_log_table" to
> "log_table" or similar.
> * Remove/modify the "conflict_" name part from many of the variables
> and function names.
> * Add another 'type' column to the log table -- e.g. everything this
> patch writes can be type="CONFL", or type='c', or whatever.
> * Maybe tweak/add some of the other columns for more generic future use
>
> Anyway, it might be worth considering this now, before everything
> becomes set in stone with a conflict-only focus, making it too
> difficult to add more potential/unknown log table enhancements later.
>
> Thoughts?
Yeah that's an interesting thought for sure, but honestly I believe
the conflict log table only for storing the conflict and conflict
resolution related data is standard followed across the databases who
provide active-active setup e.g. Oracle Golden Gate, BDR, pg active,
so IMHO to keep the feature clean and focused, we should follow the
same.
I will work on other review comments and post the patch soon.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
Google
