Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication

Moin,

On Mon, December 25, 2017 7:26 pm, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
> <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>>
>>> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
>>> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so that we can
>>> check the read LSN and set WalSndCaughtUp = true even after read a
>>> record without wait. Attached updated patch passed 'make check-world'.
>>> Please review it.
>>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This version looks good to me and seems to be in line with what we do in
>> physical replication.
>>
>> Marking as ready for committer.

(Sorry Masahiko, you'll get this twice, as fumbled the reply button.)

I have not verifed that comment and/or code are correct, just a grammar fix:

+                /*
+                 * If we've sent a record is at or beyond the flushed
point, then
+                 * we're caught up.

That should read more like this:

"If we've sent a record that is at or beyond the flushed point, we have
caught up."

All the best,

Tels