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
- v33-0006-Fixing-Walsender-corner-case-with-logical-decodi.patch (text/plain) patch v33-0006
- v33-0005-Doc-changes-describing-details-about-logical-dec.patch (text/plain) patch v33-0005
- v33-0004-New-TAP-test-for-logical-decoding-on-standby.patch (text/plain) patch v33-0004
- v33-0003-Allow-logical-decoding-on-standby.patch (text/plain) patch v33-0003
- v33-0002-Handle-logical-slot-conflicts-on-standby.patch (text/plain) patch v33-0002
- v33-0001-Add-info-in-WAL-records-in-preparation-for-logic.patch (text/plain) patch v33-0001
Hi, On 12/16/22 6:24 PM, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote: > Hi, > > On 12/16/22 5:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:08 AM Drouvot, Bertrand >> <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> After 1489b1ce728 the name mayConflictInLogicalDecoding seems odd. Seems >>>> it should be a riff on snapshotConflictHorizon? >>> >>> Gotcha, what about logicalSnapshotConflictThreat? >> >> logicalConflictPossible? checkDecodingConflict? >> >> I think we should try to keep this to three words if we can. There's >> not likely to be enough value in a fourth word to make up for the >> downside of being more verbose. >> > > > Yeah agree, I'd vote for logicalConflictPossible then. > Please find attached v33 using logicalConflictPossible as the new field name instead of mayConflictInLogicalDecoding. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com