Re: row filtering for logical replication
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Release cache tuple when no longer needed
- ed0fbc8e5ac9 15.0 landed
-
Add some additional tests for row filters in logical replication.
- ceb57afd3ce1 15.0 landed
-
Fix one of the tests introduced in commit 52e4f0cd47.
- cfb4e209ec15 15.0 landed
-
Allow specifying row filters for logical replication of tables.
- 52e4f0cd472d 15.0 landed
-
Move scanint8() to numutils.c
- cfc7191dfea3 15.0 cited
-
Replace Test::More plans with done_testing
- 549ec201d613 15.0 cited
-
Reduce relcache access in WAL sender streaming logical changes
- 6ce16088bfed 15.0 cited
-
Small cleanups related to PUBLICATION framework code
- c9105dd3660f 15.0 cited
-
Add a view to show the stats of subscription workers.
- 8d74fc96db5f 15.0 cited
-
Allow publishing the tables of schema.
- 5a2832465fd8 15.0 cited
-
Doc: improve documentation of CREATE/ALTER SUBSCRIPTION.
- 1882d6cca161 15.0 cited
-
Add PublicationTable and PublicationRelInfo structs
- 0c6828fa987b 15.0 cited
-
Remove unused argument "txn" in maybe_send_schema().
- 93d573d86571 15.0 cited
-
Add prepare API support for streaming transactions in logical replication.
- 63cf61cdeb7b 15.0 cited
-
Unify PostgresNode's new() and get_new_node() methods
- 201a76183e20 15.0 cited
-
Use l*_node() family of functions where appropriate
- 2b00db4fb0c7 15.0 cited
-
Add support for prepared transactions to built-in logical replication.
- a8fd13cab0ba 15.0 cited
-
Restore the portal-level snapshot after procedure COMMIT/ROLLBACK.
- ef9480509622 11.13 cited
-
Rename a parse node to be more general
- 91d1f2d30210 14.0 landed
-
Remove unused column atttypmod from initial tablesync query
- 4ad31bb2ef25 14.0 landed
-
SEARCH and CYCLE clauses
- 3696a600e229 14.0 cited
On 7/13/21 12:57 PM, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 10:24 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 3:01 PM Tomas Vondra >> <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> >>> In terms of implementation, I think there are two basic options - either >>> we can define a new "expression" type in gram.y, which would be a subset >>> of a_expr etc. Or we can do it as some sort of expression walker, kinda >>> like what the transform* functions do now. >>> >> >> I think it is better to use some form of walker here rather than >> extending the grammar for this. However, the question is do we need >> some special kind of expression walker here or can we handle all >> required cases via transformWhereClause() call as the patch is trying >> to do. AFAIU, the main things we want to prohibit in the filter are: >> (a) it doesn't refer to any relation other than catalog in where >> clause, (b) it doesn't use UDFs in any way (in expressions, in >> user-defined operators, user-defined types, etc.), (c) the columns >> referred to in the filter should be part of PK or Replica Identity. >> Now, if all such things can be detected by the approach patch has >> taken then why do we need a special kind of expression walker? OTOH, >> if we can't detect some of this then probably we can use a special >> walker. >> >> I think in the long run one idea to allow UDFs is probably by >> explicitly allowing users to specify whether the function is >> publication predicate safe and if so, then we can allow such functions >> in the filter clause. >> > > Another idea here could be to read the publication-related catalog > with the latest snapshot instead of a historic snapshot. If we do that > then if the user faces problems as described by Petr [1] due to > missing dependencies via UDFs then she can Alter the Publication to > remove/change the filter clause and after that, we would be able to > recognize the updated filter clause and the system will be able to > move forward. > > I might be missing something but reading publication catalogs with > non-historic snapshots shouldn't create problems as we use the > historic snapshots are required to decode WAL. > IMHO the best option for v1 is to just restrict the filters to known-safe expressions. That is, just built-in operators, no UDFs etc. Yes, it's not great, but both alternative proposals (allowing UDFs or using current snapshot) are problematic for various reasons. Even with those restrictions the row filtering seems quite useful, and we can relax those restrictions later if we find acceptable compromise and/or decide it's worth the risk. Seems better than having to introduce new restrictions later. > I think the problem described by Petr[1] is also possible today if the > user drops the publication and there is a corresponding subscription, > basically, the system will stuck with error: "ERROR: publication > "mypub" does not exist. I think allowing to use non-historic snapshots > just for publications will resolve that problem as well. > > [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/92e5587d-28b8-5849-2374-5ca3863256f1%402ndquadrant.com > That seems like a completely different problem, TBH. For example the slot is dropped too, which means the WAL is likely gone etc. regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company