On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 04:57:22PM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote: > I think the only thing to note about the patches from my side is that we > probably don't want to default to restart_lsn for the > pg_logical_replication_slot_advance() return value (when nothing was > done) but rather the confirmed_lsn. As it is in current patch if we call > the function repeatedly and one call moved slot forward but the next one > didn't the return value will go backwards as restart_lsn tends to be > behind the confirmed one.
It does not matter much as the PG_TRY loop would still enforce the result to confirmed_lsn anyway if nothing happens, still let's do as you suggest as that's more consistent. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
