Hi, On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 02:49:54PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 9:05 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > On Thursday, February 15, 2024 10:49 AM Amit Kapila > > <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:26 PM Bertrand Drouvot > > > > > > Right, we can do that or probably this test would have made more sense > > > with a > > > worker patch where we could wait for the slot to be synced. > > > Anyway, let's try to recreate the slot/subscription idea. BTW, do you > > > think that > > > adding a LOG when we are not able to sync will help in debugging such > > > problems? I think eventually we can change it to DEBUG1 but for now, it > > > can help > > > with stabilizing BF and or some other reported issues. > > > > Here is the patch that attempts the re-create sub idea. > > > > Pushed this. > > > > I also think that a LOG/DEBUG > > would be useful for such analysis, so the 0002 is to add such a log. > > > > I feel such a LOG would be useful.
Same here. > + ereport(LOG, > + errmsg("waiting for remote slot \"%s\" LSN (%X/%X) and catalog xmin" > + " (%u) to pass local slot LSN (%X/%X) and catalog xmin (%u)", > > I think waiting is a bit misleading here, how about something like: > "could not sync slot information as remote slot precedes local slot: > remote slot \"%s\": LSN (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u) local slot: LSN > (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u)" > This wording works for me. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com