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 Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 8:19 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > If ATTACH PARTITION or CREATE TABLE .. PARTITION OF don't let you > specify replica identity, I suspect it's because both partitioning and > logical replication were developed in parallel, and neither gave too > much thought to the other. > I think the reason CREATE TABLE .. syntax form doesn't have a way to specify RI is that we need to have an index for RI. Consider the below example: ---- CREATE TABLE parent (a int primary key, b int not null, c varchar) PARTITION BY RANGE(a); CREATE TABLE child PARTITION OF parent FOR VALUES FROM (0) TO (250); CREATE UNIQUE INDEX b_index on child(b); ALTER TABLE child REPLICA IDENTITY using INDEX b_index; ---- In this, the parent table's replica identity is the primary key(default) and the child table's replica identity is the b_index. I think if we want we can come up with some syntax to combine these steps and allow to specify replica identity during the second step (Create ... Partition) but not sure if we have a convincing reason for this feature per se. > > I suspect that a better way to attack this problem is to let ALTER TABLE > ... ATTACH PARTITION and CREATE TABLE .. PARTITION OF specify a replica > identity as necessary. > > My suggestion is to avoid painting us into a corner from which it will > be impossible to get out later. > Apart from the above reason, here we are just following the current model of how the update/delete behaves w.r.t RI. Now, I think in the future we can also think of uplifting some of the restrictions related to RI for filters if we find a good way to have columns values that are not in WAL. We have discussed this previously in this thread and thought that it is sensible to have a RI restriction for updates/deletes as the patch is doing for the first version. I am not against inventing some new syntaxes for row/column filter patches but there doesn't seem to be a very convincing reason for it and there is a good chance that we won't be able to accomplish that for the current version. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.