On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:38 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
>
> On 25.08.23 08:52, Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) wrote:
> > On Friday, August 25, 2023 12:28 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 12:45 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I suggest we rename this setting to something starting with debug_.
> >>> Right now, the name looks much too tempting for users to fiddle with.
> >>> I think this is similar to force_parallel_mode.
> >>>
> >>
> >> +1. How about debug_logical_replication?
> >>
> >>> Also, the descriptions in guc_tables.c could be improved. For
> >>> example,
> >>>
> >>> gettext_noop("Controls when to replicate or apply each change."),
> >>>
> >>> is pretty content-free and unhelpful.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The other possibility I could think of is to change short_desc as:
> >> "Allows to replicate each change for large transactions.". Do you have any
> >> better ideas?
> >
> > How about "Forces immediate streaming or serialization of changes in large
> > transactions." which is similar to the description in document.
> >
> > I agree that renaming it to debug_xx would be better and
> > here is a patch that tries to do this.
>
> Maybe debug_logical_replication is too general? Something like
> debug_logical_replication_streaming would be more concrete.
>
Yeah, that sounds better.
> (Or
> debug_logical_streaming.) Is that an appropriate name for what it's doing?
>
Yes.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.