RE: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions)

Hi,


On Monday, February 6, 2023 8:57 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 5:02 AM Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > -   elog(DEBUG2, "sending feedback (force %d) to recv %X/%X,
> write %X/%X, flush %X/%X in-delayed: %d",
> > +   elog(DEBUG2, "sending feedback (force %d) to recv %X/%X, write
> > + %X/%X, flush %X/%X, apply delay: %s",
> >          force,
> >          LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(recvpos),
> >          LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(writepos),
> >          LSN_FORMAT_ARGS(flushpos),
> > -        in_delayed_apply);
> > +        in_delayed_apply? "yes" : "no");
> >
> > It is better to use a string to represent the yes/no option.
> >
>
> I think it is better to be consistent with the existing force parameter which is
> also boolean, otherwise, it will look odd.
Agreed. The latest patch v29 posted in [1] followed this suggestion.

Kindly have a look at it.

[1] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/TYCPR01MB8373A59E7B74AA4F96B62BEAEDDA9%40TYCPR01MB8373.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com



Best Regards,
    Takamichi Osumi