Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-12-06T10:19:29Z
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 →
-
Migrate logical slots to the new node during an upgrade.
- 29d0a77fa660 17.0 cited
-
Make test_decoding ddl.out shorter
- d6677b93c79b 17.0 landed
- c5c5832600e9 14.9 landed
- b1dc946eee3d 16.0 landed
- 3bb8b9342f8a 15.4 landed
-
Fix snapshot handling in logicalmsg_decode
- 949ac32e1267 15.3 landed
- 8b9cbd42b61f 14.8 landed
- 4df581fa0f4b 13.11 landed
- 497f863f0598 12.15 landed
- 8de91ebf2ac1 11.20 landed
- 7fe1aa991b62 16.0 landed
-
doc: Adjust a few more references to "postmaster"
- 17e72ec45d31 16.0 cited
-
Revert "Logical decoding of sequences"
- 2c7ea57e56ca 15.0 cited
On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 11:56 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On 12/3/23 18:52, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > ... > > > > Another idea is that maybe we could somehow inform ReorderBuffer whether > the output plugin even is interested in sequences. That'd help with > cases where we don't even want/need to replicate sequences, e.g. because > the publication does not specify (publish=sequence). > > What happens now in that case is we call ReorderBufferQueueSequence(), > it does the whole dance with starting/aborting the transaction, calls > rb->sequence() which just does "meh" and doesn't do anything. Maybe we > could just short-circuit this by asking the output plugin somehow. > > In an extreme case the plugin may not even specify the sequence > callbacks, and we're still doing all of this. > We could explore this but I guess it won't solve the problem we are facing in cases where all sequences are published and plugin has specified the sequence callbacks. I think it would add some overhead of this check in positive cases where we decide to anyway do send the changes. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.