| From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Shubham Khanna <khannashubham1197(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Add support for specifying tables in pg_createsubscriber. | 
| Date: | 2025-11-03 07:24:39 | 
| Message-ID: | CAHut+PuBrust-bZD2dYutDBu7B+-L_Z8u5piMKxMNzEEiFea7Q@mail.gmail.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Hi Shubham.
A comment about the v17-0001.
======
1.
+ if (check_publication_exists(conn, dbinfo[i].pubname, dbinfo[i].dbname))
+ {
+ /* Reuse existing publication on publisher. */
+ pg_log_info("dry-run: would use existing publication \"%s\" in
database \"%s\"",
+ dbinfo[i].pubname, dbinfo[i].dbname);
+ dbinfo[i].made_publication = false;
+ }
Is that correct? Won't this code now unconditionally log with the
"dry-run:" prefix, even when the tool is *not* doing a dry-run?
I thought code would be something like:
SUGGESTION #1 (if/else)
/* Reuse existing publication on publisher. */
if (dry_run)
  pg_log_info("dry-run: would use existing publication ...);
else
  pg_log_info("use existing publication ...);
~~~
OTOH, (since here is just an info message with no destructive
operation) perhaps it would be harmless also to keep the original log
message for both dry-run and normal mode.
SUGGESTION #2 (do nothing)
pg_log_info("use existing publication ...);
======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mats Kindahl | 2025-11-03 07:27:12 | Use stack-allocated StringInfoData | 
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2025-11-03 06:53:14 | Re: Report bytes and transactions actually sent downtream |