Re: Logical Replication of sequences
shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Doc: Add documentation for sequence synchronization.
- 55cefadde874 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Remove unused assignment in CREATE PUBLICATION grammar.
- bfb7419b0bbe 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add seq_sync_error_count to subscription statistics.
- f6a4c498dcf6 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Fix few issues in commit 5509055d69.
- 5a4eba558aa7 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add sequence synchronization for logical replication.
- 5509055d6956 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add worker type argument to logical replication worker functions.
- 3e8e05596a02 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Introduce "REFRESH SEQUENCES" for subscriptions.
- f0b3573c3aac 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Refactor logical worker synchronization code into a separate file.
- 41c674d2e31e 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Standardize use of REFRESH PUBLICATION in code and messages.
- 2436b8c047ff 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Add "ALL SEQUENCES" support to publications.
- 96b378497346 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Expose sequence page LSN via pg_get_sequence_data.
- b93172ca59f4 19 (unreleased) landed
-
Resume conflict-relevant data retention automatically.
- 0d48d393d465 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Post-commit review fixes for 228c370868.
- 1f7e9ba3ac4e 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Generate GUC tables from .dat file
- 63599896545c 19 (unreleased) cited
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:15 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote: > > 3. Some of the syntaxes works for sequence which doesn't make sense to > me, as listed below, I think there are more > > postgres[154731]=# CREATE PUBLICATION insert_only FOR ALL SEQUENCES > WITH (publish = 'insert'); > CREATE PUBLICATION > > postgres[154731]=# CREATE PUBLICATION pub FOR ALL SEQUENCES WITH ( > PUBLISH_VIA_PARTITION_ROOT ); > CREATE PUBLICATION +1. I had the same concerns at [1]. It might be feasible to restrict this if we have CREATE SUB for ALL SEQ alone. But if we have ALL SEQUENCES and ALL TABLES together, then 'WITH' makes sense for tables but not for sequences. My suggestion earlier was to display a NOTICE at-least to say that WITH is not applicable to SEQUENCES (in case we can not restrict it). [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uBFXJLOiFOL8QgSeS93Bf%3DZQd86BXZa%3DMeijHQo-%3Da2cA%40mail.gmail.com thanks Shveta