Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

On 2022-12-16 11:38:33 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:08 AM Drouvot, Bertrand
> <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > After 1489b1ce728 the name mayConflictInLogicalDecoding seems odd. Seems
> > > it should be a riff on snapshotConflictHorizon?
> >
> > Gotcha, what about logicalSnapshotConflictThreat?
> 
> logicalConflictPossible? checkDecodingConflict?
> 
> I think we should try to keep this to three words if we can. There's
> not likely to be enough value in a fourth word to make up for the
> downside of being more verbose.

I don't understand what the "may*" or "*Possible" really are
about. snapshotConflictHorizon is a conflict with a certain xid - there
commonly won't be anything to conflict with. If there's a conflict in
the logical-decoding-on-standby case, we won't be able to apply it only
sometimes or such.

How about "affectsLogicalDecoding", "conflictsWithSlots" or
"isCatalogRel" or such?

Greetings,

Andres Freund