On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 at 18:10, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 5:57 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 at 13:58, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 8:46 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The attached v20251103 patch has the changes for the same.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I have pushed the 0001 after making minor adjustments in tests and at
> > > a few other places. Kindly rebase and send the remaining patches.
> >
> > I noticed a buildfarm failure on prion at [1].
> > The test failed on prion because it runs with the following additional
> > configuration:
> > log_error_verbosity = verbose
> >
> > Due to this setting, the logs include an extra LOCATION line between
> > the WARNING and ERROR messages, which was not expected by the test:
> > 2025-11-05 11:35:21.090 UTC [1357163:3] WARNING: 55000: mismatched or
> > renamed sequence on subscriber ("public.regress_s4")
> > 2025-11-05 11:35:21.090 UTC [1357163:4] LOCATION:
> > report_sequence_errors, sequencesync.c:185
> > 2025-11-05 11:35:21.090 UTC [1357163:5] ERROR: 55000: logical
> > replication sequence synchronization failed for subscription
> > "regress_seq_sub"
> >
> > I'm working on a fix for this issue.
> >
>
> We can fix it either by expecting just a WARNING for this test which
> is sufficient. The other possibility is that we can expect some other
> line(s) between WARNING and ERROR. I think just waiting for WARNING in
> the log is sufficient as that serves the purpose of this test. What do
> you think?
I also think checking only for the WARNING message in the log is
sufficient to verify the test. The attached patch includes this
change.
Alternatively, we could check for the WARNING first and then verify
the ERROR separately if needed.
Thoughts?
Regards,
Vignesh
