Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication

On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 at 11:49, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 10:40 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 9:53 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > 2. Do we want to support multi destination then providing string like
> > > 'conflict_log_destination = 'log,table,..' make more sense but then we
> > > would have to store as a string in catalog and parse it everytime we
> > > insert conflicts or alter subscription OTOH currently I have just
> > > support single option log/table/both which make things much easy
> > > because then in catalog we can store as a single char field and don't
> > > need any parsing. And since the input are taken as a string itself,
> > > even if in future we want to support more options like 'log,table,..'
> > > it would be backward compatible with old options.
> >
> > I feel, combination of options might be a good idea, similar to how
> > 'log_destination' provides. But it can be done in future versions and
> > the first draft can be a simple one.
> >
>
> Considering the future extension of storing conflict information in
> multiple places, it would be good to follow log_destination. Yes, it
> is more work now but I feel that will be future-proof.

The attached patch has the changes to specify conflict_log_destination
with a combination of table, log and all. This is implemented in
v15-0006 patch, there is no change in other patched v15-0001 ...
v15-0005 patches which are the same as the patches attached from [1].

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm1zR1L2oq-LqYEcc8-wTZYjfJsiaTC_jQ8pGwbm0fv%2B3Q%40mail.gmail.com

Regards,
Vignesh