On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 9:05 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, February 15, 2024 10:49 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 7:26 PM Bertrand Drouvot > > > > Right, we can do that or probably this test would have made more sense with > > a > > worker patch where we could wait for the slot to be synced. > > Anyway, let's try to recreate the slot/subscription idea. BTW, do you think > > that > > adding a LOG when we are not able to sync will help in debugging such > > problems? I think eventually we can change it to DEBUG1 but for now, it can > > help > > with stabilizing BF and or some other reported issues. > > Here is the patch that attempts the re-create sub idea. >
Pushed this. > I also think that a LOG/DEBUG > would be useful for such analysis, so the 0002 is to add such a log. > I feel such a LOG would be useful. + ereport(LOG, + errmsg("waiting for remote slot \"%s\" LSN (%X/%X) and catalog xmin" + " (%u) to pass local slot LSN (%X/%X) and catalog xmin (%u)", I think waiting is a bit misleading here, how about something like: "could not sync slot information as remote slot precedes local slot: remote slot \"%s\": LSN (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u) local slot: LSN (%X/%X), catalog xmin (%u)" -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.