On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 7:25 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 5:01 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> >
> > We do expose the required information (restart_lsn, catalog_xmin,
> > synced, temporary, etc) via pg_replication_slots. So, I feel the LOG
> > message here is sufficient to DEBUG
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 5:01 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
>
> We do expose the required information (restart_lsn, catalog_xmin,
> synced, temporary, etc) via pg_replication_slots. So, I feel the LOG
> message here is sufficient to DEBUG (or know the details) when the
> slot sync doesn't succeed.
>
Ple
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 4:50 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 4:42 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > So why do we log a message about this?
> >
> > This was added after the main commit of this functionality to find
> > some BF failures (where we were expecting the slot to sync but due
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 4:42 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > So why do we log a message about this?
>
> This was added after the main commit of this functionality to find
> some BF failures (where we were expecting the slot to sync but due to
> one of these conditions not being met the slot was not sync
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 4:21 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 12:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > > But I also don't quite understand what problem this is trying to
> > > report. Is this slot-syncing code running on the primary or the
> > > standby? If it's running on the primary,
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 12:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Does the primary error message really need to say "could not sync
> > slot"? If it will be obvious from context that we were trying to sync
> > a slot, then it would be fine to just say "ERROR: remote slot precedes
> > local slot".
>
> As thi
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 12:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:42 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:04 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote:
> > > Or I thought the values could be moved to DETAILS: line.
> >
> > Yeah, I think that's likely to be the right app
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:42 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:04 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> > Or I thought the values could be moved to DETAILS: line.
>
> Yeah, I think that's likely to be the right approach here. The details
> aren't too clear to me.
>
> Does the primar
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:04 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
> Or I thought the values could be moved to DETAILS: line.
Yeah, I think that's likely to be the right approach here. The details
aren't too clear to me.
Does the primary error message really need to say "could not sync
slot"? If it will
At Mon, 19 Feb 2024 10:31:33 +0530, Robert Haas wrote
in
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 10:10 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> > A recent commit (7a424ece48) added the following message:
> >
> > > could not sync slot information as remote slot precedes local slot:
> > > remote slot "%s": LSN (%X/%X),
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 10:31 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 10:10 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> > A recent commit (7a424ece48) added the following message:
> >
> > > could not sync slot information as remote slot precedes local slot:
> > > remote slot "%s": LSN (%X/%X), cata
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 10:10 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
> A recent commit (7a424ece48) added the following message:
>
> > could not sync slot information as remote slot precedes local slot:
> > remote slot "%s": LSN (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u) local slot: LSN
> > (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u)
>
> Si
A recent commit (7a424ece48) added the following message:
> could not sync slot information as remote slot precedes local slot:
> remote slot "%s": LSN (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u) local slot: LSN
> (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u)
Since it is a bit overloaded but doesn't have a separator between
"catalo
13 matches
Mail list logo
