Horton

RE: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication

Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>

View thread
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>
To: 'Amit Kapila' <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani@google.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Date: 2025-03-17T01:22:59Z
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. Fix typo in test file name added in commit 4909b38af0.

  2. Fix data loss in logical replication.

  3. Avoid invalidating all RelationSyncCache entries on publication rename.

  4. Remove obsolete RECHECK keyword completely

  5. Backport BackgroundPsql perl test module

Attachments

Dear Amit,

> IIUC, workloads C and D will have regression in back branches, and
> HEAD will have regression only for workload D. We have avoided
> workload C regression in HEAD via commits 7c99dc587a and 3abe9dc188.

Right.

> We can backpatch those commits if required, but I think it is better
> not to do those as scenarios C and D won't be that common, and we
> should go ahead with the fix as it is. In the future, if we get any
> way to avoid regression due to scenario-D, then we can do that for the
> HEAD branch.

OK, let me share patched for back branches. Mostly the same fix patched as master
can be used for PG14-PG17, like attached. Regarding the PG13, it cannot be applied
as-is thus some adjustments are needed. I will share it in upcoming posts.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED