On Friday, January 20, 2023 5:54 PM shveta malik <shveta.ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 1:08 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > a) the message should say that this is the *remaining* time to left to wait.
> >
> > b) it might be convenient to know from the log what was the original
> > min_apply_delay value in the 1st place.
> >
> > For example, the logs might look something like this:
> >
> > DEBUG: time-delayed replication for txid 1234, min_apply_delay =
> > 160000 ms. Remaining wait time: 159972 ms
> > DEBUG: time-delayed replication for txid 1234, min_apply_delay =
> > 160000 ms. Remaining wait time: 142828 ms
> > DEBUG: time-delayed replication for txid 1234, min_apply_delay =
> > 160000 ms. Remaining wait time: 129994 ms
> > DEBUG: time-delayed replication for txid 1234, min_apply_delay =
> > 160000 ms. Remaining wait time: 110001 ms ...
> >
>
> +1
> This will also help when min_apply_delay is set to a new value in between the
> current wait. Lets say, I started with min_apply_delay=5 min, when the worker
> was half way through this, I changed min_apply_delay to 3 min or say 10min, I
> see the impact of that change i.e. new wait-time is adjusted, but log becomes
> confusing. So, please keep this scenario as well in mind while improving
> logging.
Yes, now the change of min_apply_delay value can be detected
since I followed the format provided above. So, this scenario is also covered.
Best Regards,
Takamichi Osumi
