Re: [HACKERS] Subscription code improvements

On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Peter Eisentraut
 wrote:
> On 8/4/17 12:02, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> To make ALTER SUBSCRIPTION REFRESH being transactional, I prefer
>> Petr's proposal. Because it can make ALTER SUBSCRIPTION and DROP
>> SUBSCRIPTION stop the table sync workers that are in progress of
>> copying data. I'm not sure killing table sync workers in DDL commands
>> would be acceptable but since it can free unnecessary slots of logical
>> replication workers and replication slots I'd prefer this idea.
>
> OK, I have committed the 0004 patch.

Thank you!

>
>> However, even with this patch there is still an issue that NOTICE
>> messages "removed subscription for table public.t1" can be appeared
>> even if we rollback ALTER SUBSCRIPTION REFRESH command as I mentioned
>> on earlier thread. Since I think this behaviour will confuse users who
>> check server logs I'd like to deal with it, I don't have a good idea
>> though.
>
> Maybe we can just remove those messages?
>
> We don't get messages when we create a subscription about which tables
> are part of it.  So why do we need such messages when we refresh a
> subscription?

I think that the messages is useful when we add/remove tables to/from
the publication and then refresh the subscription, so we might want to
change it to DEBUG rather than elimination.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center