Re: Rename sync_error_count to tbl_sync_error_count in subscription statistics
Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>
From: Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou@gmail.com>
To: shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amitkapila16@gmail.com>,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-11-12T07:32:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi, On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 1:04 PM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 9:54 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > This patch proposes renaming a column in the view > > pg_stat_subscription_stats to disambiguate between table sync and > > sequence sync error counts. With the introduction of > > seq_sync_error_count, the existing column name sync_error_count > > becomes ambiguous, it's unclear whether it refers to tables, > > sequences, or both. Renaming it to tbl_sync_error_count makes the > > meaning explicit: it represents errors that occurred during table > > synchronization. This helps users avoid confusion when interpreting > > the view's output. Thanks for the patch. > +1 on the intent. It will definitely help avoid confusion in the names. > > I’m slightly leaning toward using 'table_sync_error_count' instead of > 'tbl_sync_error_count'. The name 'table_sync_error_count' isn’t too > long and should work fine, while 'tbl_..' feels more like an internal > variable name. But I would like to see what others prefer here. > > thanks > Shveta > > +1 for using table_sync_error_count as the user-facing column name — it’s clearer and consistent with existing catalog naming. Do we need to bump CATALOG_VERSION_NO for this update? -- Best, Xuneng
Commits
-
Rename two columns in pg_stat_subscription_stats.
- 3edaf29fa5e0 19 (unreleased) landed