From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication |
Date: | 2023-11-27 01:22:38 |
Message-ID: | CAHut+Pt=RvEODnSp9LXRenZyE2qkuk3JOZBEgEhYuq+UxLKWRw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Here are some review comments for patch set v19*
//////
v19-0001.
No comments
///////
v19-0002.
(I saw that both changes below seemed cut/paste from similar
functions, but I will ask the questions anyway).
======
src/backend/commands/subscriptioncmds.c
1.
+/* Potentially set by pg_upgrade_support functions */
+Oid binary_upgrade_next_pg_subscription_oid = InvalidOid;
+
The comment "by pg_upgrade_support functions" seemed a bit vague. IMO
you might as well tell the name of the function that sets this.
SUGGESTION
Potentially set by the pg_upgrade_support function --
binary_upgrade_set_next_pg_subscription_oid().
~~~
2. CreateSubscription
+ if (!OidIsValid(binary_upgrade_next_pg_subscription_oid))
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
+ errmsg("pg_subscription OID value not set when in binary upgrade mode")));
Doesn't this condition mean some kind of impossible internal error
occurred -- i.e. should this be elog instead of ereport?
======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-11-27 01:43:50 | Re: GUC names in messages |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2023-11-27 01:11:14 | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 |