Re: row filtering for logical replication

Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-03-01T00:54:58Z
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. Release cache tuple when no longer needed

  2. Add some additional tests for row filters in logical replication.

  3. Fix one of the tests introduced in commit 52e4f0cd47.

  4. Allow specifying row filters for logical replication of tables.

  5. Move scanint8() to numutils.c

  6. Replace Test::More plans with done_testing

  7. Reduce relcache access in WAL sender streaming logical changes

  8. Small cleanups related to PUBLICATION framework code

  9. Add a view to show the stats of subscription workers.

  10. Allow publishing the tables of schema.

  11. Doc: improve documentation of CREATE/ALTER SUBSCRIPTION.

  12. Add PublicationTable and PublicationRelInfo structs

  13. Remove unused argument "txn" in maybe_send_schema().

  14. Add prepare API support for streaming transactions in logical replication.

  15. Unify PostgresNode's new() and get_new_node() methods

  16. Use l*_node() family of functions where appropriate

  17. Add support for prepared transactions to built-in logical replication.

  18. Restore the portal-level snapshot after procedure COMMIT/ROLLBACK.

  19. Rename a parse node to be more general

  20. Remove unused column atttypmod from initial tablesync query

  21. SEARCH and CYCLE clauses

On 1 March 2018 at 07:03, Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The attached patches add support for filtering rows in the publisher.
> The output plugin will do the work if a filter was defined in CREATE
> PUBLICATION command. An optional WHERE clause can be added after the
> table name in the CREATE PUBLICATION such as:
>
> CREATE PUBLICATION foo FOR TABLE departments WHERE (id > 2000 AND id <=
> 3000);
>
> Row that doesn't match the WHERE clause will not be sent to the
> subscribers.
>
> Patches 0001 and 0002 are only refactors and can be applied
> independently. 0003 doesn't include row filtering on initial
> synchronization.
>


Good idea. I haven't read this yet, but one thing to make sure you've
handled is limiting the clause to referencing only the current tuple and
the catalogs. user-catalog tables are OK, too, anything that is
RelationIsAccessibleInLogicalDecoding().

This means only immutable functions may be invoked, since a stable or
volatile function might attempt to access a table. And views must be
prohibited or recursively checked. (We have tree walkers that would help
with this).

It might be worth looking at the current logic for CHECK expressions, since
the requirements are similar. In my opinion you could safely not bother
with allowing access to user catalog tables in the filter expressions and
limit them strictly to immutable functions and the tuple its self.

-- 
 Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services