Re: repeated decoding of prepared transactions

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 7:26 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 4:13 PM Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 7:47 PM Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > I've updated snapshot_was_exported_at_ member to pg_replication_slots as well.
> > > Do have a look and let me know if there are any comments.
> >
> > Update with both patches.
>
> Thanks for fixing and providing an updated patch. Patch applies, make
> check and make check-world passes. I could see the issue working fine.
>
> Few minor comments:
> + <structfield>snapshot_was_exported_at</structfield> <type>pg_lsn</type>
> + </para>
> + <para>
> + The address (<literal>LSN</literal>) at which the logical
> + slot found a consistent point at the time of slot creation.
> + <literal>NULL</literal> for physical slots.
> + </para></entry>
> + </row>
>
>
> I had seen earlier also we had some discussion on naming
> snapshot_was_exported_at. Can we change snapshot_was_exported_at to
> snapshot_exported_lsn, I felt if we can include the lsn in the name,
> the user will be able to interpret easily and also it will be similar
> to other columns in pg_replication_slots view.
>

I have recommended above to change this name to initial_consistency_at
because there are times when we don't export snapshot and we still set
this like when creating slots with CRS_NOEXPORT_SNAPSHOT or when
creating via SQL APIs. I am not sure why Ajin neither changed the
name nor responded to that comment. What is your opinion?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.