On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 4:14 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 9:33 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:21 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 8:25 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada > > > > <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The errcontext message would become like follows: > > > > > > > > > > *Before > > > > > ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "test_pkey" > > > > > DETAIL: Key (c)=(1) already exists. > > > > > CONTEXT: processing remote data during "INSERT" for replication > > > > > target relation "public.test" in transaction 726 at 2022-02-28 > > > > > 20:59:56.005909+09 > > > > > > > > > > * After > > > > > ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "test_pkey" > > > > > DETAIL: Key (c)=(1) already exists. > > > > > CONTEXT: processing remote data during "INSERT" for replication > > > > > target relation "public.test" in transaction 726 committed at LSN > > > > > 0/14BFA88 and timestamp 2022-02-28 20:58:27.964238+09 from replication > > > > > origin "pg_16395" > > > > > > > > > > I'm a bit concerned that the message may be too long. > > > > > > > > If you are willing to use abbreviations instead of full > > > > words/sentences perhaps you can shorten the long CONTEXT part like > > > > below? > > > > > > > > Before: > > > > CONTEXT: processing remote data during "INSERT" for replication > > > > target relation "public.test" in transaction 726 committed at LSN > > > > 0/14BFA88 and timestamp 2022-02-28 20:58:27.964238+09 from > > > > replication origin "pg_16395" > > > > > > > > After: > > > > CONTEXT: processing remote data during "INSERT" for replication target > > > > relation "public.test" (txid 726, LSN 0/14BFA88, ts 2022-02-28 > > > > 20:58:27.964238+09, origin "pg_16395") > > > > > > > > > > I am wondering whether we can avoid having a timestamp in the message? > > > If one wants, it can be retrieved from the errors otherwise as well. > > > For example, I see the below error in my machine: > > > 2022-02-26 07:45:25.092 IST [17644] ERROR: duplicate key value > > > violates unique constraint "t1_pkey" > > > 2022-02-26 07:45:25.092 IST [17644] DETAIL: Key (c1)=(1) already exists. > > > 2022-02-26 07:45:25.092 IST [17644] CONTEXT: processing remote data > > > during "INSERT" for replication target relation "public.t1" in > > > transaction 724 at 2022-02-26 07:45:09.083848+05:30 > > > > > > Now, here, won't the time at the starting of CONTEXT serves our > > > purpose. If we can remove the timestamp, I think the message won't > > > appear too long. What do you think? > > > > The time of the CONTEXT log message and the time in the message would > > largely vary when the subscriber is much behind the publisher. But I > > basically agree that the timestamp in the message might not be > > important, at least for now. If we will support conflict resolution > > that resolves based on the commit timestamp in the future, we might > > want it again. > > > > Possible, but let's remove it for now as it will simplify the message > and the need for additional branches. What do you think?
Agreed. I've attached updated patches. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
v2-0001-Use-complete-sentences-in-logical-replication-wor.patch
Description: Binary data
v2-0002-Add-the-origin-name-and-remote-commit-LSN-to-logi.patch
Description: Binary data
