On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 9:25 PM David G. Johnston <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 7:52 AM PG Doc comments form <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: >> >> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/logical-replication-upgrade.html >> Description: >> >> Hello there, >> >> I don't know if it's me but I find this sentence quite confusing in its >> current wording: >> All slots on the old cluster must be usable, i.e., there are no slots whose >> pg_replication_slots.conflicting is not true. >> >> The prerequisite is that no replication slot has conflicting=true right? >> So this sentence (the i.e. part) suggests the opposite, as per my >> understanding. >> >> Here is the link (29.13.1): >> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/logical-replication-upgrade.html#STEPS-TWO-NODE-CIRCULAR-LOGICAL-REPLICATION-CLUSTER:~:text=there%20are%20no%20slots%20whose%20pg_replication_slots.conflicting%20is%20not%20true >> > > You are correct. Usage of a double-negative should be avoided as a matter of > style, but in this case it actually resolves to an untrue statement. > > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/7fdeaf5774d05245e82632e763665ff62db5598e > > I've copied the committer for this. Removing the "not" is simple enough; > though writing in the negative sense, >
How about: "All slots on the old cluster must be usable, i.e., there are no slots whose pg_replication_slots.conflicting is false."? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
