Horton

Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, tushar <tushar.ahuja@enterprisedb.com>, Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Shaun Thomas <shaun.thomas@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2019-09-27T17:51:30Z
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. Reduce the log level in 035_standby_logical_decoding.pl.

  2. 035_standby_logical_decoding: Add missing waits for replication

  3. For cascading replication, wake physical and logical walsenders separately

  4. Handle logical slot conflicts on standby

  5. Support invalidating replication slots due to horizon and wal_level

  6. Prevent use of invalidated logical slot in CreateDecodingContext()

  7. Replace replication slot's invalidated_at LSN with an enum

  8. Pass down table relation into more index relation functions

  9. Assert only valid flag bits are passed to visibilitymap_set()

  10. Remove unused _bt_delitems_delete() argument.

  11. Add xl_btree_delete optimization.

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:41 PM Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan.pg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Preferably I want wait_for_xmins() to get rid of the $node parameter,
> because we can deduce it using slot name. But that requires having
> get_node_from_slotname(). Your suggestion was to remove
> get_node_from_slotname() and add back the $node param so as to reduce
> duplicate code. Instead, how about keeping  wait_for_xmins() in the
> PostgresNode.pm() ? This way, we won't have duplication, and also we
> can get rid of param $node. This is just my preference; if you are
> quite inclined to not have get_node_from_slotname(), I will go with
> your suggestion.

I'd be inclined not to have it.  I think having a lookup function to
go from slot name -> node is strange; it doesn't really simplify
things that much for the caller, and it makes the logic harder to
follow. It would break outright if you had the same slot name on
multiple nodes, which is a perfectly reasonable scenario.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company