From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Log prefix missing for subscriber log messages received from publisher |
Date: | 2025-07-21 01:14:43 |
Message-ID: | 3dbe69f3-e1ce-442d-a978-dd016a38c592@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025/07/19 15:45, vignesh C wrote:
>> Also, I don't see why there are three patches here instead of just one.
>
> Earlier we thought to commit replication changes function firstlly and
> then commit dblink and fdw changes, but now that we are using a common
> notice receiver function. I feel it can be a single patch.
Yes, I initially suggested splitting the patches for that reason,
but I agree it's better to merge them into a single patch now that
we're using a shared custom notice receiver.
> Merged the
> patches. The attached v7 version patch has the changes for the same.
Thanks for updating the patch! It looks good to me, except for one minor point:
static inline PGresult *libpqsrv_get_result(PGconn *conn, uint32 wait_event_info);
+static inline void libpqsrv_notice_receiver(void *arg, const PGresult *res);
This prototype is only needed if the function is used earlier in libpq-be-fe-helpers.h,
but that's not the case here, so I don't think it's necessary.
Unless there are objections, I'll remove that prototype and commit the patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NTT DATA Japan Corporation
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | feichanghong | 2025-07-21 01:58:09 | Re: Even when the data is already ordered, MergeAppend still adds a Sort node |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-07-21 00:59:04 | Re: index prefetching |