Horton

Re: Support logical replication of DDLs

Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
To: Zheng Li <zhengli10@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, rajesh singarapu <rajesh.rs0541@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-05-26T08:35:50Z
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 →

  1. Add a run_as_owner option to subscriptions.

  2. Refactor pgoutput_change().

  3. Print the correct aliases for DML target tables in ruleutils.

  4. Fix object identity string for transforms

  5. Add grantable MAINTAIN privilege and pg_maintain role.

  6. Get rid of recursion-marker values in enum AlterTableType

  7. Release cache tuple when no longer needed

  8. Empty search_path in logical replication apply worker and walsender.

  9. Refactor format_type APIs to be more modular

  10. Use wrappers of PG_DETOAST_DATUM_PACKED() more.

On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 6:02 AM Zheng Li <zhengli10@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > 4. The handling related to partition tables seems missing because, on
> > > the subscriber-side, it always creates a relation entry in
> > > pg_subscription_rel which won't work. Check its interaction with
> > > publish_via_partition_root.
> >
> > I will test it out.
>
> Hi,
>
> patch 0010 properly handles partitioned table creation on the apply
> worker. Whether a replicated partitioned table should be added to
> pg_subscription_rel catalog depends on the setting of
> publish_via_partition_root of the publication. Thus we need to connect
> to the source DB and check if the partitioned table is in
> pg_catalog.pg_publication_tables after the apply worker creates the
> partitioned table.
>
> Thanks to Borui Yang for enabling and testing replication of DDL type
> T_RenameStmt in patch 0009.
>
> I've also rebased all the patches. Github branch of the same change
> can be found here:
> https://github.com/zli236/postgres/commits/ddl_replication

Thank you for updating the patches!

I've not looked at these patches in-depth yet but with this approach,
what do you think we can handle the DDL syntax differences between
major versions? DDL syntax or behavior could be changed by future
changes and I think we need to somehow deal with the differences. For
example, if the user uses logical replication for major version
upgrade, the publisher is older than the subscriber. We might have to
rewrite the DDL before applying to the subscriber because the DDL
executed on the publisher no longer work on a new PostgreSQL version
or we might have to add some options to the DDL before the application
in order to keep the same behavior. This seems to require a different
solution from what the patch does for the problem you mentioned such
as "DDL involving multiple tables where only some tables are
replicated”.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB:  https://www.enterprisedb.com/