On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 12:47 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 03:20:30PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I would prefer to associate the new parameter 'flush' with > > non-transactional messages as per the proposed patch. > > Check. > > > Is there a reason to make the functions strict now when they were not > > earlier? > > These two are already STRICT on HEAD: > =# select proname, provolatile, proisstrict from pg_proc > where proname ~ 'message'; > proname | provolatile | proisstrict > -------------------------+-------------+------------- > pg_logical_emit_message | v | t > pg_logical_emit_message | v | t > (2 rows) >
oh, I misunderstood the default. > > An updated version is attached. How does it look? > LGTM. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.