Re: row filtering for logical replication
Peter Smith <smithpb2250@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 Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 4:26 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 12:15 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 12:39 AM houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com > > <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > 3) v55-0002 > > > > +static bool pgoutput_row_filter_update_check(enum > > > > ReorderBufferChangeType changetype, Relation relation, > > > > + > > > > HeapTuple oldtuple, HeapTuple newtuple, > > > > + > > > > RelationSyncEntry *entry, ReorderBufferChangeType *action); > > > > > > > > Do we need parameter changetype here? I think it could only be > > > > REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_UPDATE. > > > > > > I didn't change this, I think it might be better to wait for Ajin's opinion. > > > > I agree with Tang. AFAIK there is no problem removing that redundant > > param as suggested. BTW - the Assert within that function is also > > incorrect because the only possible value is > > REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_UPDATE. I will make these fixes in a future > > version. > > > > That sounds fine to me too. One more thing is that you don't need to > modify the action in case it remains update as the caller has already > set that value. Currently, we are modifying it as update at two places > in this function, we can remove both of those and keep the comments > intact for the later update. > Fixed in v59* [1] ------ [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHut%2BPsiw9fbOUTpCMWirut1ZD5hbWk8_U9tZya4mG-YK%2Bfq8g%40mail.gmail.com Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia