Horton

RE: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation

Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
To: 'Fujii Masao' <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, 'vignesh C' <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-03-21T01:12:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Dear Fujii-san,

> Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me.
> 
> I'm considering whether to back-patch these changes to older versions.
> Since pg_recvlogical --drop-slot worked without --dbname in 9.4
> but started failing unintentionally in 9.5, it could be considered a bug.
> However, this behavior has existed for a long time without complaints or
> bug reports, and there was no clear documentation stating that
> --drop-slot should work without --dbname.
> 
> Given this, I think that also we could treat it as not a bug and apply
> the change only to the master branch. What do you think should we
> back-patch it as a bug fix or apply it only to master?

Personally considered, such a long-standing but harmless bug can be regarded as
the specification. So, I vote that this is an enhancement and be applied only to
master.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED

Commits

  1. Allow pg_recvlogical --drop-slot to work without --dbname.

  2. doc: Clarify required options for each action in pg_recvlogical.

  3. Refactor replication connection code of various pg_basebackup utilities.