Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>

To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2020-04-03T15:04:23Z

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 →

Fix RELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE issue
- 12fb189bfeaf 13.0 landed
Allow publishing partition changes via ancestors
- 83fd4532a721 13.0 landed
Add logical replication support to replicate into partitioned tables
- f1ac27bfda6c 13.0 landed
Refactor code to look up local replication tuple
- d8653f468789 13.0 landed
Some refactoring of logical/worker.c
- 97ee604d9bce 13.0 landed
Prepare to support non-tables in publications
- c314c147c056 13.0 landed
Support adding partitioned tables to publication
- 17b9e7f9fe23 13.0 landed

On 03/04/2020 16:59, Tom Lane wrote:
> Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> AFAIK gcov can't handle multiple instances of same process being started
>> as it just overwrites the coverage files. So for TAP test it will report
>> bogus info (as in some code that's executed will look as not executed).
> 
> Hm, really?  I routinely run "make check" (ie, parallel regression
> tests) under coverage, and I get results that seem sane.  If I were
> losing large chunks of the data, I think I'd have noticed.
> 

Parallel regression still just starts single postgres instance no?

-- 
Petr Jelinek
2ndQuadrant - PostgreSQL Solutions for the Enterprise
https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/