On 17.06.25 20:19, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> Ideally, we should change both to maintain consistency across various
>>> slot options. OTOH, as we have already described these options as: "
>>> The --two-phase and --failover options can be specified with
>>> --create-slot.", it is clear that these are slot options. The previous
>>> version docs have a description: "The --two-phase can be specified
>>> with --create-slot to enable decoding of prepared transactions." which
>>> makes it even more clear that the two-phase is a slot option. The
>>> options are named similarly in pg_create_logical_replication_slot API
>>> and during CREATE SUBSCRIPTION, so, to some level, there is a
>>> consistency in naming of these options across all APIs/tools. But,
>>> their usage in a tool like pg_recvlogical could be perceived
>>> differently as well, so it is also okay to consider naming them
>>> differently.
>>
>> Also note that we have a new pg_createsubscriber --enable-two-phase.
>
> Yeah, I also noticed the precedent.
>
>> It would be nice if there was more consistency between similar/related
>> tools.
>
> I've attached the patch. Feedback is very welcome.
This looks fine to me, but I would keep the old name --two-phase as
well. You could mark it as deprecated. No need to make a hard break.
