On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 10:35 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 9:37 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> >> IMO the type of information you'd want for apply failures is substantially >> >> different enough from worker failures that I don't really see the temptation >> to put them in the same table. >> > > It's an error message and a transaction LSN in both cases right now, along > with knowledge of whether said transaction only affects a single table (relid > is not null) or not (relid is null). Do you have a concrete idea in mind > that would make this separation need more obvious? >
I would also like to mention that in some cases, sync workers also behaves like apply worker (after initial sync till it catches up with the apply worker) and try to stream and apply changes similar to apply worker. The error during that phase will be no different than the apply worker. One idea to make the separation more obvious is to introduce 'worker_type' column similar to backend_type in pg_stat_activity which will tell whether it is an apply worker or a table sync worker. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
