Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Smith
Subject Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Date
Msg-id CAHut+PvS6DJNzu3gawb3ZHav7Eb2qMo+AUn+p1D3Vkvs-Wj3JQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions  ("osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com" <osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com>)
Responses RE: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 5:59 PM osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com
<osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> (2)
>
> File : v39-0006-Support-2PC-txn-Subscription-option.patch
>
> @@ -213,6 +219,15 @@ parse_subscription_options(List *options,
>                         *streaming_given = true;
>                         *streaming = defGetBoolean(defel);
>                 }
> +               else if (strcmp(defel->defname, "two_phase") == 0 && twophase)
> +               {
> +                       if (*twophase_given)
> +                               ereport(ERROR,
> +                                               (errcode(ERRCODE_SYNTAX_ERROR),
> +                                                errmsg("conflicting or redundant options")));
> +                       *twophase_given = true;
> +                       *twophase = defGetBoolean(defel);
> +               }
>
> You can add this test in subscription.sql easily with double twophase options.

Thanks for the feedback. You are right.

But in the pgoutput.c there are several other potential syntax errors
"conflicting or redundant options" which are just like this
"two_phase" one.
e.g. there is the same error for options "proto_version",
"publication_names", "binary", "streaming".

AFAIK none of those other syntax errors had any regression tests. That
is the reason why I did not include any new test for the "two_phase"
option.

So:
a) should I add a new test per your feedback comment, or
b) should I be consistent with the other similar errors, and not add the test?

Of course it is easy to add a new test if you think option (a) is best.

Thoughts?

-----
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Snapshot scalability patch issue
Next
From: "osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions