On Monday, July 22, 2024 7:13 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 10:59 AM shveta malik <shveta.ma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 10:46 AM shveta malik <shveta.ma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > We have a query in failover-ready doc referring to > > > pg_subscription_rel. Unlike pg_subscription, pg_subscription_rel > > > gives results only when connected to the database having the > > > subscription(s). If we run the concerned query on any other > > > database, it will give incomplete results i.e. it will give info on > > > main slots leaving table sync slots (if any). > > > Thus the failover-ready steps which queries pg_subscription_rel need > > > to mention that the concerned query needs to be run on the > > > database(s) that includes the failover enabled subscription(s). > > > Corrected the doc for the same. > > > > On rethinking, since pg_subscription query needs to be run only once > > on *any* database to get combined results of all main slots while > > pg_subscription_rel query needs to be run on each database having > > concerned subscription (and table), does it makes sense to separate > > the 2 queries instead of having UNION ? Thoughts? > > > > I think so. Let's see if Hou-San or anyone else has better ideas to fetch this > information.
I also agree that separating the 2 queries makes sense. Best Regards, Hou zj
