Re: row filtering for logical replication
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.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 Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 6:47 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:12 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:50 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 4:44 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Few other comments: > > > =================== > > > > Few more comments: > > ================== > > v46-0001/0002 > > =============== > > 1. After rowfilter_walker() why do we need > > EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE? I thought this is primarily to identify > > the expressions that are not allowed in rowfilter which we are now > > able to detect upfront with the help of a walker. Can't we instead use > > EXPR_KIND_WHERE? > > FYI - I have tried this locally and all tests pass. > > ~~ > > If the EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE is removed then there will be some > differences: > - we would get errors for aggregate/grouping functions from the EXPR_KIND_WHERE > - we would get errors for windows functions from the EXPR_KIND_WHERE > - we would get errors for set-returning functions from the EXPR_KIND_WHERE > > Actually, IMO this would be a *good* change because AFAIK those are > not all being checked by the row-filter walker. I think the only > reason all tests pass is that there are no specific regression tests > for these cases. > > OTOH, there would also be a difference where an error message would > not be as nice. Please see the review comment from Vignesh. [1] The > improved error message is only possible by checking the > EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE. > > ~~ > > I think the best thing to do here is to leave the > EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE but simplify code so that the improved > error message remains as the *only* difference in behaviour from the > EXPR_KIND_WHERE. i.e. we should let the other > aggregate/grouping/windows/set function checks give errors exactly the > same as for the EXPR_KIND_WHERE case. > I am not sure if "the better error message" is a good enough reason to introduce this new kind. I thought it is better to deal with that in rowfilter_walker. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.