Re: Logical Replication of sequences
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 →
-
Doc: Add documentation for sequence synchronization.
- 55cefadde874 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Remove unused assignment in CREATE PUBLICATION grammar.
- bfb7419b0bbe 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add seq_sync_error_count to subscription statistics.
- f6a4c498dcf6 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Fix few issues in commit 5509055d69.
- 5a4eba558aa7 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add sequence synchronization for logical replication.
- 5509055d6956 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add worker type argument to logical replication worker functions.
- 3e8e05596a02 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Introduce "REFRESH SEQUENCES" for subscriptions.
- f0b3573c3aac 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Refactor logical worker synchronization code into a separate file.
- 41c674d2e31e 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Standardize use of REFRESH PUBLICATION in code and messages.
- 2436b8c047ff 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add "ALL SEQUENCES" support to publications.
- 96b378497346 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Expose sequence page LSN via pg_get_sequence_data.
- b93172ca59f4 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Resume conflict-relevant data retention automatically.
- 0d48d393d465 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Post-commit review fixes for 228c370868.
- 1f7e9ba3ac4e 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Generate GUC tables from .dat file
- 63599896545c 19 (unreleased) cited
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:56 PM Yogesh Sharma <yogesh.sharma@catprosystems.com> wrote: > > On 6/4/24 06:57, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > 2. Provide a command say Alter Subscription ... Replicate Sequences > > (or something like that) which users can perform before shutdown of > > the publisher node during upgrade. This will allow copying all the > > sequences from the publisher node to the subscriber node directly. > > Similar to previous approach, this could also be inconvenient for > > users. > > This is similar to option 1 except that it is a SQL command now. > Right, but I would still prefer a command as it provides clear steps for the upgrade. Users need to perform (a) Replicate Sequences for a particular subscription (b) Disable that subscription (c) Perform (a) and (b) for all the subscriptions corresponding to the publisher we want to shut down for upgrade. I agree there are some manual steps involved here but it is advisable for users to ensure that they have received the required data on the subscriber before the upgrade of the publisher node, otherwise, they may not be able to continue replication after the upgrade. For example, see the "Prepare for publisher upgrades" step in pg_upgrade docs [1]. > > > 3. Replicate published sequences via walsender at the time of shutdown > > or incrementally while decoding checkpoint record. The two ways to > > achieve this are: (a) WAL log a special NOOP record just before > > shutting down checkpointer. Then allow the WALsender to read the > > sequence data and send it to the subscriber while decoding the new > > NOOP record. (b) Similar to the previous idea but instead of WAL > > logging a new record directly invokes a decoding callback after > > walsender receives a request to shutdown which will allow pgoutput to > > read and send required sequences. This approach has a drawback that we > > are adding more work at the time of shutdown but note that we already > > waits for all the WAL records to be decoded and sent before shutting > > down the walsender during shutdown of the node. > > At the time of shutdown a) most logical upgrades don't necessarily call > for shutdown > Won't the major version upgrade expect that the node is down? Refer to step "Stop both servers" in [1]. > b) it will still add to total downtime with large set of > sequences. Incremental option is better as it will not require a shutdown. > > I do see a scenario where sequence of events can lead to loss of sequence > and generate duplicate sequence values, if subscriber starts consuming > sequences while publisher is also consuming them. In such cases, subscriber > shall not be allowed sequence consumption. > It would be fine to not allow subscribers to consume sequences that are being logically replicated but what about the cases where we haven't sent the latest values of sequences before the shutdown of the publisher? In such a case, the publisher would have already consumed some values that wouldn't have been sent to the subscriber and now when the publisher is down then even if we re-allow the sequence values to be consumed from the subscriber, it can lead to duplicate values. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/pgupgrade.html -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.