Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From shveta malik
Subject Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Date
Msg-id CAJpy0uAbLG9s2STFbJpAknWzDMnaDGOa4n2fTpLMAV9A0QjN5A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 5:42 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > 4)
> > For the DETAIL part of resume and stop messages, how about these:
> >
> > The retention duration for information used in conflict detection has
> > exceeded the limit of xx.
> > The retention duration for information used in conflict detection is
> > now within the acceptable limit of xx.
> > The retention duration for information used in conflict detection is
> > now indefinite.
> >
>
> Similar to the previous point, will it be better to keep it short by
> using "conflict detection info", for example, it will lead to message
> like "The retention duration for conflict detection info is now
> indefinite."?
>

Works for me as I understand the context. But could it be confusing
for users? Could it be inferred as info about conflicts rather than
info used while detecting conflicts?

thanks
Shveta



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: jian he
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER DOMAIN ADD NOT NULL NOT VALID
Next
From: "Peter Geoghegan"
Date:
Subject: Re: index prefetching