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 Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 5:13 PM Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 6:29 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I think in terms of referring to old and new rows, we already have > > terminology which we used at various other similar places. See Create > > Rule docs [1]. For where clause, it says "Within condition and > > command, the special table names NEW and OLD can be used to refer to > > values in the referenced table. NEW is valid in ON INSERT and ON > > UPDATE rules to refer to the new row being inserted or updated. OLD is > > valid in ON UPDATE and ON DELETE rules to refer to the existing row > > being updated or deleted.". We need similar things for the WHERE > > clause in publication if we want special syntax to refer to old and > > new rows. > > > > I have no doubt we COULD allow references to OLD and NEW in the WHERE > clause, but do we actually want to? > This is what I thought could cause confusion, when mixed with the > model that I previously described. > It's not entirely clear to me exactly how it works, when the WHERE > clause is applied to the OLD and NEW rows, when the WHERE condition > itself can refer to OLD and/or NEW (coupled with the fact that NEW > doesn't make sense for DELETE and OLD doesn't make sense for INSERT). > It is not new, the same is true when they are used in RULES and probably in other places where we use them. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.