Horton

Re: Support logical replication of DDLs

Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Cc: Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>, Zheng Li <zhengli10@gmail.com>, li jie <ggysxcq@gmail.com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>, rajesh singarapu <rajesh.rs0541@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-02-15T04:00:26Z
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, Feb 11, 2023 at 3:21 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 Feb 2023 at 03:47, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Vignesh, thanks for addressing my v63-0002 review comments.
> >
> > I confirmed most of the changes. Below is a quick follow-up for the
> > remaining ones.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 10:32 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 at 06:47, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > ...
> > > >
> > > > 8.
> > > > + value = findJsonbValueFromContainer(container, JB_FOBJECT, &key);
> > > >
> > > > Should the code be checking or asserting value is not NULL?
> > > >
> > > > (IIRC I asked this a long time ago - sorry if it was already answered)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, this was already answered by Zheng, quoting as "The null checking
> > > for value is done in the upcoming call of expand_one_jsonb_element()."
> > > in [1]
> >
> > Thanks for the info. I saw that Zheng-san only wrote it is handled in
> > the “upcoming call of expand_one_jsonb_element”, but I don’t know if
> > that is sufficient. For example, if the execution heads down the other
> > path (expand_jsonb_array) with a NULL jsonarr then it going to crash,
> > isn't it? So I still think some change may be needed here.
>
> Added an Assert for this.
>

Was this a correct change to make here?

IIUC this Assert is now going to intercept both cases including the
expand_one_jsonb_element() which previously would have thrown a proper
ERROR.

------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia