Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:51 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 12:52 PM houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com
> <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:31 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > Right. I've fixed this issue and attached an updated patch.
> > >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have few comments for the testcases.
> >
> > 1)
> >
> > +my $appname = 'tap_sub';
> > +$node_subscriber->safe_psql(
> > + 'postgres',
> > + "CREATE SUBSCRIPTION tap_sub CONNECTION '$publisher_connstr application_name=$appname' PUBLICATION tap_pub WITH (streaming = off, two_phase = on);");
> > +my $appname_streaming = 'tap_sub_streaming';
> > +$node_subscriber->safe_psql(
> > + 'postgres',
> > + "CREATE SUBSCRIPTION tap_sub_streaming CONNECTION '$publisher_connstr application_name=$appname_streaming' PUBLICATION tap_pub_streaming WITH (streaming = on, two_phase = on);");
> > +
> >
> > I think we can remove the 'application_name=$appname', so that the command
> > could be shorter.
>
> But we wait for the subscription to catch up by using
> wait_for_catchup() with application_name, no?
>

Yeah, but you can directly use the subscription name in
wait_for_catchup because we internally use that as
fallback_application_name. If application_name is not specified in the
connection string as suggested by Hou-San then
fallback_application_name will be considered. Both ways are okay and I
see we use both ways in the tests but it seems there are more places
where we use the method Hou-San is suggesting in subscription tests.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.