Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys
Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Reduce the log level in 035_standby_logical_decoding.pl.
- 3034dc56ef4b 16.0 landed
-
035_standby_logical_decoding: Add missing waits for replication
- 57411c82ce86 16.0 landed
-
For cascading replication, wake physical and logical walsenders separately
- e101dfac3a53 16.0 landed
-
Handle logical slot conflicts on standby
- 26669757b6a7 16.0 landed
-
Support invalidating replication slots due to horizon and wal_level
- be87200efd93 16.0 landed
-
Prevent use of invalidated logical slot in CreateDecodingContext()
- 4397abd0a2af 16.0 landed
-
Replace replication slot's invalidated_at LSN with an enum
- 15f8203a5975 16.0 landed
-
Pass down table relation into more index relation functions
- 61b313e47eb9 16.0 landed
-
Assert only valid flag bits are passed to visibilitymap_set()
- a88a18b1250b 16.0 landed
-
Remove unused _bt_delitems_delete() argument.
- dc43492e46c7 14.0 cited
-
Add xl_btree_delete optimization.
- d2e5e20e5711 13.0 cited
Attachments
- v63-0006-Doc-changes-describing-details-about-logical-dec.patch (text/plain) patch v63-0006
- v63-0005-New-TAP-test-for-logical-decoding-on-standby.patch (text/plain) patch v63-0005
- v63-0004-For-cascading-replication-wake-up-physical-walse.patch (text/plain) patch v63-0004
- v63-0003-Allow-logical-decoding-on-standby.patch (text/plain) patch v63-0003
- v63-0002-Arrange-for-a-new-pg_stat_database_conflicts-and.patch (text/plain) patch v63-0002
- v63-0001-Handle-logical-slot-conflicts-on-standby.patch (text/plain) patch v63-0001
Hi, On 4/6/23 4:20 PM, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: > Hi, > > On 4/6/23 3:39 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 6:32 PM Drouvot, Bertrand >> <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I don't think it could be possible to create logical walsenders on a standby if >>> AllowCascadeReplication() is not true, or am I missing something? >>> >> >> Right, so why to even traverse walsenders for that case? What I was >> imagining a code is like: >> if (AllowCascadeReplication()) >> WalSndWakeup(switchedTLI, true); >> >> Do you see any problem with this change? > > Not at all, it looks good to me. > >> Done in V63 attached and did change the associated comment a bit. >> Few more minor comments on 0005 >> ============================= >> 0005 >> 1. >> + <para> >> + Take a snapshot of running transactions and write this to WAL without >> + having to wait bgwriter or checkpointer to log one. >> >> /wait bgwriter/wait for bgwriter >> >> 2. >> +use Test::More tests => 67; >> >> We no more use the number of tests. Please refer to other similar tests. >> > > Thanks! Will update 0005. > Done in V63. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com