On 05/05/17 02:46, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, May  4, 2017 at 05:09:40PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I would not in any way refer to logical decoding as being only a proof
>>>> of concept, even before logical replication.
>>> The community ships a reliable logical _encoding_, and a test logical
>>> _decoding_.
>> Yes, so what?  What you said is "I didn't think logical decoding was
>> really more than a proof-of-concept until now", which is plainly wrong,
>> given I know a significant number of users using it in production.  Some
>> of them are well known & large enterprises, and it's used to enable
>> critical things.
> I am getting tired of saying this.  When I am writing the release notes,
> I am trying to figure out how it affects our shipped code, and the only
> "decoding" I know of is test_decoding.  My message was this:

I actually think the main misunderstanding here comes from the
test_decoding name interpretation. The test_decoding does not decode
anything and there are no external "decoders". The decoding happens in
core, the decoding just provides C API for plugins to consume the
decoded info (ie, heap tuples and similar). The test_decoding *tests*
the decoding API and the external projects use the decoding API as well
but they don't really decode anything, their role is of filtering and
deciding the wire protocol mostly.

  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to