Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker?

Looking at the V29 style tablesync slot names now they appear like this:

WARNING:  could not drop tablesync replication slot
"pg_16397_sync_16389_6927117142022745645"
That is in the order subid +  relid + sysid

Now that I see it in a message it seems a bit strange with the sysid
just tacked onto the end like that.

I am wondering if reordering of parent to child might be more natural.
e.g sysid + subid + relid gives a more intuitive name IMO.

So in this example it would be "pg_sync_6927117142022745645_16397_16389"

Thoughts?

----
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith
Fujitsu Australia