RE: Logical Replication of sequences

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

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

To: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>

Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Nisha Moond <nisha.moond412@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>

Date: 2025-10-20T11:59:30Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

v20251020_2-0001-Introduce-REFRESH-SEQUENCES-for-subscrip.patch (application/octet-stream)
v20251020_2-0002-New-worker-for-sequence-synchronization-.patch (application/octet-stream)
v20251020_2-0003-Documentation-for-sequence-synchronizati.patch (application/octet-stream)

> Here is the latest patch set which addressed Shveta[1], Amit[2], Chao[3][4],
> Dilip[5], Sawada-San's[6] comments.

I found the patch could not pass the sanity check, because 0001 missed a comma.
Also, there was a duplicated entry for `REFRESH SEQUENCES`.

Attached set fixed the issue.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED