Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
"Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2023-12-06T13:39:42Z
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 →
-
Migrate logical slots to the new node during an upgrade.
- 29d0a77fa660 17.0 cited
-
Make test_decoding ddl.out shorter
- d6677b93c79b 17.0 landed
- c5c5832600e9 14.9 landed
- b1dc946eee3d 16.0 landed
- 3bb8b9342f8a 15.4 landed
-
Fix snapshot handling in logicalmsg_decode
- 949ac32e1267 15.3 landed
- 8b9cbd42b61f 14.8 landed
- 4df581fa0f4b 13.11 landed
- 497f863f0598 12.15 landed
- 8de91ebf2ac1 11.20 landed
- 7fe1aa991b62 16.0 landed
-
doc: Adjust a few more references to "postmaster"
- 17e72ec45d31 16.0 cited
-
Revert "Logical decoding of sequences"
- 2c7ea57e56ca 15.0 cited
On 12/6/23 10:05, Dilip Kumar wrote: > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 11:12 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 11:22 PM Tomas Vondra >> <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> > > I was also wondering what happens if the sequence changes are > transactional but somehow the snap builder state changes to > SNAPBUILD_FULL_SNAPSHOT in between processing of the smgr_decode() and > the seq_decode() which means RelFileLocator will not be added to the > hash table and during the seq_decode() we will consider the change as > non-transactional. I haven't fully analyzed that what is the real > problem in this case but have we considered this case? what happens if > the transaction having both ALTER SEQUENCE and nextval() gets aborted > but the nextva() has been considered as non-transactional because > smgr_decode() changes were not processed because snap builder state > was not yet SNAPBUILD_FULL_SNAPSHOT. > Yes, if something like this happens, that'd be a problem: 1) decoding starts, with SnapBuildCurrentState(builder) < SNAPBUILD_FULL_SNAPSHOT 2) transaction that creates a new refilenode gets decoded, but we skip it because we don't have the correct snapshot 3) snapshot changes to SNAPBUILD_FULL_SNAPSHOT 4) we decode sequence change from nextval() for the sequence This would lead to us attempting to apply sequence change for a relfilenode that's not visible yet (and may even get aborted). But can this even happen? Can we start decoding in the middle of a transaction? How come this wouldn't affect e.g. XLOG_HEAP2_NEW_CID, which is also skipped until SNAPBUILD_FULL_SNAPSHOT. Or logical messages, where we also call the output plugin in non-transactional cases. regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company