On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 12:24 AM Paul Martinez <paul...@google.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 8:17 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > What exactly are you bothered about here? Is the database name not > > present in the message your concern or the message uses 'replication' > > but actually it doesn't relate to 'replication' specified in > > pg_hba.conf your concern? I think with the current scheme one might > > say that replication word in error message helps them to distinguish > > logical replication connection error from a regular connection error. > > I am not telling what you are proposing is wrong but just that the > > current scheme of things might be helpful to some users. If you can > > explain a bit how the current message misled you and the proposed one > > solves that confusion that would be better? > > > > My main confusion arose from conflating the word "replication" in the > error message with the "replication" keyword in pg_hba.conf. > > In my case, I was actually confused because I was creating logical > replication connections that weren't getting rejected, despite a lack > of any "replication" rules in my pg_hba.conf. I had the faulty > assumption that replication connection requires "replication" keyword, > and my change to the documentation makes it explicit that logical > replication connections do not match the "replication" keyword. >
I think it is good to be more explicit in the documentation but we already mention "physical replication connection" in the sentence. So it might be better that we add a separate sentence related to logical replication. > I was digging through the code trying to understand why it was working, > and also making manual connections before I stumbled upon these error > messages. > > The fact that the error message doesn't include the database name > definitely contributed to my confusion. It only mentions the word > "replication", and not a database name, and that reinforces the idea > that the "replication" keyword rule should apply, because it seems > "replication" has replaced the database name. > > But overall, I would agree that the current messages aren't wrong, > and my fix could still cause confusion because now logical replication > connections won't be described as "replication" connections. > > How about explicitly specifying physical vs. logical replication in the > error message, and also adding hints for clarifying the use of > the "replication" keyword in pg_hba.conf? > Yeah, hints or more details might improve the situation but I am not sure we want to add more branching here. Can we write something similar to HOSTNAME_LOOKUP_DETAIL for hints? Also, I think what you are proposing to write is more of a errdetail kind of message. See more error routines in the docs [1]. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/error-message-reporting.html -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
