On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 11:18 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 5:16 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 for the idea > > > > > There is potential for lots of developer GUCs for testing/debugging in > > the area of logical replication but IMO it might be better to keep > > them all separated. Putting everything into a single > > 'logical_replication_mode' might cause difficulties later when/if you > > want combinations of the different modes. > > > > For example, instead of > > > > logical_replication_mode = XXX/YYY/ZZZ > > > > maybe something like below will give more flexibility. > > > > logical_replication_dev_XXX = true/false > > logical_replication_dev_YYY = true/false > > logical_replication_dev_ZZZ = true/false > > > > Even I agree that usability wise keeping them independent is better. >
But OTOH, doesn't introducing multiple GUCs (one to allow streaming each change, another to allow serialization, and a third one to probably test subscriber-side work) for the purpose of testing, and debugging logical replication code sound a bit more? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
