On Tuesday, March 22, 2022 7:50 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 7:25 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > > > On Monday, March 21, 2022 6:01 PM Amit Kapila > > > <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > Oh, sorry, I posted the wrong patch, here is the correct one. > > > > The test change looks good to me. I think additionally we can verify that the > record is not reflected in the subscriber table. Apart from that, I had made > minor changes mostly in the comments in the attached patch. If those look > okay to you, please include those in the next version.
Thanks, the changes look good to me, I merged the diff patch. Attach the new version patch which include the following changes: - Fix a typo - Change the requestreply flag of the newly added WalSndKeepalive to false, because the subscriber can judge whether it's necessary to post a reply based on the received LSN. - Add a testcase to make sure there is no data in subscriber side when the transaction is skipped. - Change the name of flag skipped_empty_xact to skipped_xact which seems more understandable. - Merge Amit's suggested changes. Best regards, Hou zj
v29-0001-Skip-empty-transactions-for-logical-replication.patch
Description: v29-0001-Skip-empty-transactions-for-logical-replication.patch
