On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 6:00 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 5:37 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 4:21 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The bigger question is do we want to give users an option > > > for skip_empty_streams similar to skip_empty_xacts? I would again > > > prefer to give a separate option to the user as well. What do you > > > think? > > > > Yeah, I think giving an option would be better. > > I think we should also think about the combinations of the > skip_empty_xacts and skip_empty_streams. For example, if the user > passes the skip_empty_xacts to false and skip_empty_streams to true > then what should be the behavior, if the complete transaction > option1: It should not print any stream_start/stream_stop and just > print commit stream because skip_empty_xacts is false and > skip_empty_streams is true. > option2: It should print the stream_start message for the very first > stream because it is the first stream if the txn and skip_empty_xacts > is false so print it and later it will print-stream commit. > option3: Or for the first stream we first put the BEGIN message i.e > stream begin > stream start > stream stop > stream commit > option4: the user should not be allowed to pass skip_empty_xacts = > false with skip_empty_streams to true. Because if the streaming mode > is on then we can not print the xact without printing streams. > > What is your opinion on this? >
I would prefer option-4 and in addition to that we can ensure that if skip_empty_xacts = true then by default skip_empty_streams is also true. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.