Re: repeated decoding of prepared transactions

On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 8:29 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 7:26 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 4:13 PM Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 7:47 PM Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've updated snapshot_was_exported_at_  member to pg_replication_slots as well.
> > > > Do have a look and let me know if there are any comments.
> > >
> > > Update with both patches.
> >
> > Thanks for fixing and providing an updated patch. Patch applies, make
> > check and make check-world passes. I could see the issue working fine.
> >
> > Few minor comments:
> > +       <structfield>snapshot_was_exported_at</structfield> <type>pg_lsn</type>
> > +      </para>
> > +      <para>
> > +       The address (<literal>LSN</literal>) at which the logical
> > +       slot found a consistent point at the time of slot creation.
> > +       <literal>NULL</literal> for physical slots.
> > +      </para></entry>
> > +     </row>
> >
> >
> > I had seen earlier also we had some discussion on naming
> > snapshot_was_exported_at. Can we change snapshot_was_exported_at to
> > snapshot_exported_lsn, I felt if we can include the lsn in the name,
> > the user will be able to interpret easily and also it will be similar
> > to other columns in pg_replication_slots view.
> >
>
> I have recommended above to change this name to initial_consistency_at
> because there are times when we don't export snapshot and we still set
> this like when creating slots with CRS_NOEXPORT_SNAPSHOT or when
> creating via SQL APIs.  I am not sure why Ajin neither changed the
> name nor responded to that comment. What is your opinion?

initial_consistency_at looks good to me. That is more understandable.

Regards,
Vignesh