Re: [BUG]Update Toast data failure in logical replication
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Cc: Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@enterprisedb.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>, "tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com" <tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-02-04T12:15:36Z
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 →
-
WAL log unchanged toasted replica identity key attributes.
- 5e01001ffb38 15.0 landed
- b5e060473273 10.21 landed
- 1cd5802ac69a 11.16 landed
- ce349cf176e2 12.11 landed
- caa231be97df 13.7 landed
- 04645bbcae72 14.3 landed
-
Add new wal_level, logical, sufficient for logical decoding.
- e55704d8b2fe 9.4.0 cited
-
Add the notion of REPLICA IDENTITY for a table.
- 07cacba983ef 9.4.0 cited
Attachments
- HEAD-v7-0001-WAL-log-unchanged-toasted-replica-identity-key-at.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v7-0001
- 14-v7-0001-WAL-log-unchanged-toasted-replica-identity-key-a.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v7-0001
- 13-v7-0001-WAL-log-unchanged-toasted-replica-identity-key-a.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v7-0001
- 12-v7-0001-WAL-log-unchanged-toasted-replica-identity-key-a.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v7-0001
- 11-v7-0001-WAL-log-unchanged-toasted-replica-identity-key-a.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v7-0001
- 10-v7-0001-WAL-log-unchanged-toasted-replica-identity-key-a.patch (application/octet-stream) patch v7-0001
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 9:03 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I have changed this and various other comments in the patch. I have > > modified the docs as well to reflect the changes. I thought of adding > > a test but I think the current test in toast.sql seems sufficient. > > Kindly let me know what you think of the attached? I think we should > > backpatch this till v10. What do you think? > > Looks fine to me. > Attached are the patches for back-branches till v10. I have made two modifications: (a) changed heap_tuple_attr_equals() to heap_attr_equals() as we are not passing tuple to it; (b) changed parameter name 'check_external_cols' to 'external_cols' to make it sound similar to existing parameter 'interesting_cols' in HeapDetermine* function. Let me know what you think of the attached? Do you see any reason not to back-patch this fix? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.