Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com>
From: Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
"Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-07-21T11:49:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- v51-0001-Preserve-conflict-relevant-data-during-logical-r.patch (application/octet-stream)
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 9:30 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 10:32 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 3:01 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 5:03 AM Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) > > > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Here are some review comments and questions: > > > > > > > > > --- > > > + if (inCommitOnly && > > > + (proc->delayChkptFlags & DELAY_CHKPT_IN_COMMIT) == 0) > > > + continue; > > > + > > > > > > I've not verified yet but is it possible that we exclude XIDs of > > > processes who are running on other databases? > > > > > > > I can't see how, even the comments atop function says: " We look at > > all databases, though there is no need to include WALSender since this > > has no effect on hot standby conflicts." which indicate that it > > shouldn't exlude XIDs of procs who are running on other databases. > > > > I think I misunderstood your question. You were asking if possible, we > should exclude XIDs of processes running on other databases in the > above check as for our purpose, we don't need those. If so, I agree > with you, we don't need XIDs of other databases as logical WALSender > will anyway won't process transactions in other databases, so we can > exclude those. The function GetOldestActiveTransactionId() is called > from two places in patch get_candidate_xid() and > ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage(). We don't need to care for XIDs in > other databases at both places but care for > Commit_Critical_Section_Phase when called from > ProcessStandbyPSRequestMessage(). So, we probably need two parameters > to distinguish those cases. > It seems unnecessary to track transactions on other databases, as they won't be replicated to the subscriber. So, a new parameter 'allDbs' is introduced to control the filtering of transactions from other databases. Attached updated V51 patch. Thank you Hou-san for updating the patch for this change. -- Thanks, Nisha