Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side

On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:46 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 5:30 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 5:54 PM houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com
> > <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Here is another comment:
> > >
> > > +char *
> > > +logicalrep_message_type(LogicalRepMsgType action)
> > > +{
> > > ...
> > > + case LOGICAL_REP_MSG_STREAM_END:
> > > + return "STREAM END";
> > > ...
> > >
> > > I think most the existing code use "STREAM STOP" to describe the
> > > LOGICAL_REP_MSG_STREAM_END message, is it better to return "STREAM STOP" in
> > > function logicalrep_message_type() too ?
> > >
> >
> > +1
> > I think you're right, it should be "STREAM STOP" in that case.
>
> It's right that we use "STREAM STOP" rather than "STREAM END" in many
> places such as elog messages, a callback name, and source code
> comments. As far as I have found there are two places where we’re
> using "STREAM STOP": LOGICAL_REP_MSG_STREAM_END and a description in
> doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml. Isn't it better to fix these
> inconsistencies in the first place? I think “STREAM STOP” would be
> more appropriate.
>

I think keeping STREAM_END in the enum 'LOGICAL_REP_MSG_STREAM_END'
seems to be a bit better because of the value 'E' we use for it.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.