On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 7:40 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I think they should say something like > > > > > > "logical replication starts skipping transaction with LSN %X/%X" > > > "logical replication completed skipping transaction with LSN %X/%X" > > > > > > > This looks better to me. > > +1 > > > If you find the above argument to > > differentiate between the start and end LSN convincing then we can > > think of replacing "with" in the above messages with "finished at". I > > see your point related to using "finished at" for PREPARE may not be a > > good idea but I don't have better ideas for the same. > > Given that the user normally doesn't need to be aware of the > difference between start LSN and end LSN in the context of using this > feature, I think we can use "with LSN %X/%X". >
Fair enough. Alvaro, would you like to push your proposed change? Otherwise, I am happy to take care of this. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
