Re: [PATCH] add relation and block-level filtering to pg_waldump

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 05:11, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Cool.
>
> I had another thought while changing that (and also re-alphabetising):
> Why don't we switch to -B for --block and -R for --relation? I
> gather you used -k and -l because -b and -r were already taken, but
> since we already started using upper case for -F, it seems consistent
> this way. Or were they chosen for consistency with something else?
>
> It's also slightly more helpful to a user if the help says
> --relation=T/D/R instead of N/N/N (TS/DB/REL would be nicer but
> doesn't fit in the space).

Thanks for updating the patch!

+ printf(_(" -x, --xid=XID only show records with transaction ID XID\n"));

I think the description of transaction ID is enough, IIUC, XID is use in core,
which means transaction ID.

See: src/bin/pg_resetwal/pg_resetwal.c

1239 printf(_(" -V, --version output version information, then exit\n"));
1240 printf(_(" -x, --next-transaction-id=XID set next transaction ID\n"));

+ if (sscanf(optarg, "%u/%u/%u",
+ &config.filter_by_relation.spcNode,
+ &config.filter_by_relation.dbNode,
+ &config.filter_by_relation.relNode) != 3 ||
+ !OidIsValid(config.filter_by_relation.spcNode) ||
+ !OidIsValid(config.filter_by_relation.relNode))

It seems we should also check the dbNode.

--
Regrads,
Japin Li.
ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.