On Sat, Oct 8, 2022 at 2:23 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Peter Smith <smithpb2...@gmail.com> writes: > > WARNING: tables were not subscribed, you will have to run ALTER > > SUBSCRIPTION ... REFRESH PUBLICATION to subscribe the tables > > > When I first encountered the above CREATE SUBSCRIPTION warning message > > I thought it was dubious-looking English... > > > On closer inspection I think the message has some other things that > > could be improved: > > a) it is quite long which IIUC is generally frowned upon > > b) IMO most of the text it is more like a "hint" about what to do > > You're quite right about both of those points, but I think there's > even more to criticize: "tables were not subscribed" is a basically > useless message, and probably not even conceptually accurate. > Looking at the code, I think the situation being complained of is that > we have created the subscription's main catalog entries locally, but > since we were told not to connect to the publisher, we don't know what > tables the subscription is supposed to be reading. I'm not sure what > the consequences of that are: do we not read any data at all yet, or > what? > > I think maybe a better message would be along the lines of > > WARNING: subscription was created, but is not up-to-date > HINT: You should now run %s to initiate collection of data. > > Thoughts?
Yes, IMO it's better to change the message more radically as you did. But if it's OK to do that then: - maybe it should mention the connection since the connect=false was what caused this warning. - maybe saying 'replication' instead of 'collection of data' would be more consistent with the pgdocs for CREATE SUBSCRIPTION e.g. WARNING: subscription was created, but is not connected HINT: You should run %s to initiate replication. (I can update the patch when the final text is decided) ------ Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia