On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 3:21 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 1:11 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I'm concerned that these new names will introduce confusion; if we > > have last_error_relid, last_error_command, last_error_message, > > last_error_time, and last_error_xid, I think users might think that > > first_error_time is the timestamp at which an error occurred for the > > first time in the subscription worker. > > You mean you think users might think "first_error_time" is the > timestamp at which the last_error first occurred (rather than the > timestamp of the first of any type of error that occurred) on that > worker?
I felt that "first_error_time" is the timestamp of the first of any type of error that occurred on the worker. > > > ... Also, I'm not sure > > last_error_count is not clear to me (it looks like showing something > > count but the only "last" one?). > > It's the number of times that the last_error has occurred. > Unless it's some kind of transient error, that might get resolved > without intervention, logical replication will get stuck in a loop > retrying and the last error will occur again and again, hence the > count of how many times that has happened. > Maybe there's not much benefit in counting different errors prior to > the last error? The name "last_error_count" is somewhat clear to me now. I had felt that since the last error refers to *one* error that occurred last and it’s odd there is the count of it. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
