On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 10:45 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2023-Jul-05, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > On 2023-Jul-05, Euler Taveira wrote: > > > > > Isn't this numerical value already exposed in the error message (X = 88)? > > > In this example, it is: > > > > > > ERROR: invalid logical replication message type "X" > > > CONTEXT: processing remote data for replication origin "pg_16638" during > > > message type "??? (88)" in transaction 796, finished at 0/1626698 > > > > > > IMO it could be confusing if we provide two representations of the same > > > data (X > > > and 88). Since we already provide "X" I don't think we need "88". > > > > The CONTEXT message could theoretically appear in other error throws, > > not just in "invalid logical replication message". So the duplicity is > > not really a problem. > > Ah, but you're thinking that if the message type is invalid, then it > will have been rejected in the "invalid logical replication message" > stage, so no invalid message type will be reported. >
Yeah, but it would still be displayed both in context and the actual message. > I guess there's a > point to that argument as well. > One point to note is that the user may also get confused if the actual ERROR says message type as 'X' and the context says '???'. I feel in this case duplicate information is better than different information. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.