Horton

Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-04-17T13:23:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Fix RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE issue

  2. Allow publishing partition changes via ancestors

  3. Add logical replication support to replicate into partitioned tables

  4. Refactor code to look up local replication tuple

  5. Some refactoring of logical/worker.c

  6. Prepare to support non-tables in publications

  7. Support adding partitioned tables to publication

On 2020-04-09 09:28, Amit Langote wrote:
>> This patch makes the tests pass for me:
>>
>> diff --git a/src/backend/replication/pgoutput/pgoutput.c
>> b/src/backend/replication/pgoutput/pgoutput.c
>> index 5fbf2d4367..cf6e8629c1 100644
>> --- a/src/backend/replication/pgoutput/pgoutput.c
>> +++ b/src/backend/replication/pgoutput/pgoutput.c
>> @@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ maybe_send_schema(LogicalDecodingContext *ctx,
>>
>>           /* Map must live as long as the session does. */
>>           oldctx = MemoryContextSwitchTo(CacheMemoryContext);
>> -       relentry->map = convert_tuples_by_name(indesc, outdesc);
>> +       relentry->map =
>> convert_tuples_by_name(CreateTupleDescCopy(indesc),
>> CreateTupleDescCopy(outdesc));
>>           MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldctx);
>>           send_relation_and_attrs(ancestor, ctx);
>>           RelationClose(ancestor);
>>
>> Please check.
> 
> Thanks.  Yes, that's what I just found out too and was about to send a
> patch, which is basically same as yours as far as the fix for this
> issue is concerned.

I have committed my patch but not ...

> While figuring this out, I thought the nearby code could be rearranged
> a bit, especially to de-duplicate the code.  Also, I think
> get_rel_sync_entry() may be a better place to set the map, rather than
> maybe_send_schema().  Thoughts?

because I didn't really have an opinion on that at the time, but if you 
still want it considered or have any open thoughts on this thread, 
please resend or explain.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services