On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 11:22 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 5. > + > + <varlistentry > id="sql-createsubscription-params-with-detect-update-deleted"> > + <term><literal>detect_update_deleted</literal> > (<type>boolean</type>)</term> > + <listitem> > + <para> > + Specifies whether the detection of <xref > linkend="conflict-update-deleted"/> > + is enabled. The default is <literal>false</literal>. If set to > + true, the dead tuples on the subscriber that are still useful for > + detecting <xref linkend="conflict-update-deleted"/> > + are retained, > > One of the purposes of retaining dead tuples is to detect > update_delete conflict. But, I also see the following in 0001's commit > message: "Since the mechanism relies on a single replication slot, it > not only assists in retaining dead tuples but also preserves commit > timestamps and origin data. These information will be displayed in the > additional logs generated for logical replication conflicts. > Furthermore, the preserved commit timestamps and origin data are > essential for consistently detecting update_origin_differs conflicts." > which indicates there are other cases where retaining dead tuples can > help. So, I was thinking about whether to name this new option as > retain_dead_tuples or something along those lines? >
The other possible option name could be retain_conflict_info. Sawada-San, and others, do you have any preference for the name of this option? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
