On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 at 05:27, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 06:56:05AM +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 at 06:52, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 at 19:26, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I will analyze more on this and post the analysis in the subsequent mail.
> >>
> >> I analyzed further and felt that retaining subscription oid would be
> >> cleaner as subscription/subscription_rel/replication_origin/replication_origin_status
> >> all of these will be using the same oid as earlier and also probably
> >> help in supporting upgrade of subscription in more scenarios later.
> >> Here is a patch to handle the same.
> >
> > Sorry I had attached the older patch, here is the correct updated one.
>
> Thanks for digging into that. I think that we should consider that
> once the main patch is merged and stable in the tree for v17 to get a
> more consistent experience.
Yes, that approach makes sense.
> Shouldn't this include a test in the new
> TAP test for the upgrade of subscriptions? It should be as simple as
> cross-checking the OIDs of the subscriptions before and after the
> upgrade.
Added a test for the same.
The changes for the same are present in v19-0002 patch.
Regards,
Vignesh