wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL
As per my understabding, current postgres server supports only three
values for wal_level i.e. 'minimal' , 'replica' or 'logical'. But
following error message brought to notice that there are various code
spots that try to look for wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL:
select * from pg_create_logical_replication_slot('regression_slot',
'test_decoding');
ERROR: logical decoding requires wal_level >= logical
The code locations that look for/expect wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL are:
heapam.c 7690 * This is only used in wal_level >=
WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL, and only for catalog
logical.c 83 errmsg("logical decoding requires wal_level >=
logical")));
standby.c LogStandbySnapshot 950 if (wal_level
= WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL)
xlog.h XLogLogicalInfoActive 162 #define
XLogLogicalInfoActive() (wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL)
Since postgres does not allow wal_level > WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL, the above
code locations should be modified like:
s/>=/=
Thoughts/Suggestions?
Regards,
Neha
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com> wrote:
As per my understabding, current postgres server supports only three
values for wal_level i.e. 'minimal' , 'replica' or 'logical'. But
following error message brought to notice that there are various code
spots that try to look for wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL:
I suspect that this was intended as future-proofing. I think it's
actually very reasonable to write the internal tests that way, but it
does seem strange that it's crept into the user-visible error
messages.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 24 May 2017 at 10:29 pm, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com>
wrote:As per my understabding, current postgres server supports only three
values for wal_level i.e. 'minimal' , 'replica' or 'logical'. But
following error message brought to notice that there are various code
spots that try to look for wal_level >= WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL:I suspect that this was intended as future-proofing. I think it's
actually very reasonable to write the internal tests that way,
Agreed. Share the same thought and also started another thread just for the
user visible error message improvement [1]/messages/by-id/CAFO0U+_y8AyAcQLiF3S1i6yCNuYrcLNEd-BbzCuHiGOSejW=2A@mail.gmail.com. In that thread the error
message is perceived to be correct.
but it
does seem strange that it's crept into the user-visible error
messages.
Yep, this seems useful for developer but not the end user.
[1]: /messages/by-id/CAFO0U+_y8AyAcQLiF3S1i6yCNuYrcLNEd-BbzCuHiGOSejW=2A@mail.gmail.com
/messages/by-id/CAFO0U+_y8AyAcQLiF3S1i6yCNuYrcLNEd-BbzCuHiGOSejW=2A@mail.gmail.com
Regards,
Neha
--
Cheers,
Neha