| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alexey Lesovsky <lesovsky(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
| Date: | 2021-11-17 11:17:18 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KPDT1V6xocqbRgypeDpH-5r0mve5kJ8NyMza5Rakb54w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 4:16 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Few comments:
> 1) should we set subwentry to NULL to handle !create && !found case
> or we could return NULL similar to the earlier function.
>
I think it is good to be consistent with the nearby code in this case.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-11-17 11:27:42 | Re: Parallel vacuum workers prevent the oldest xmin from advancing |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-11-17 11:14:11 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |