Re: logical_replication_mode

From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Subject: Re: logical_replication_mode
Date: 2023-08-29 07:25:40
Message-ID: CAHut+PuhDGL4DOfXnkDoPqWMUkVXeJM8iYFfmAEqoAWdrNE59g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Hou-san.

I had a look at the patch 0001.

It looks OK to me, but here are a couple of comments:

======

1. Is this fix intended for PG16?

I found some mention of this GUC old name lurking in the release v16 notes [1].

~~~

2. DebugLogicalRepStreamingMode

-/* possible values for logical_replication_mode */
+/* possible values for debug_logical_replication_streaming */
typedef enum
{
- LOGICAL_REP_MODE_BUFFERED,
- LOGICAL_REP_MODE_IMMEDIATE
-} LogicalRepMode;
+ DEBUG_LOGICAL_REP_STREAMING_BUFFERED,
+ DEBUG_LOGICAL_REP_STREAMING_IMMEDIATE
+} DebugLogicalRepStreamingMode;

Shouldn't this typedef name be included in the typedef.list file?

------
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/release-16.html

Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-08-29 07:39:51 Re: Wrong usage of pqMsg_Close message code?
Previous Message Jeevan Chalke 2023-08-29 07:05:07 More new SQL/JSON item methods