On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 8:57 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > v4-0002 looks good btw, except the bitpick about test comment similar
> > to my earlier comment regarding v5-0001:
> >
> > +# Change the column order of table on publisher
> >
> > I think it might be better to say something specific to
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 2:18 PM Amit Langote wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:26 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 1:03 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 13, 2022 1:53 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > I have separated out the bug-fix for the
On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 12:10 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 7:08 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 7, 2022, at 1:10 AM, Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > The logical replication tablesync ignores the publication 'publish'
> > operations during the initial data copy.
> >
> >
On Thu, June 9, 2022 7:02 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> > I think one approach to fix it is to check the target partition in this
> > case,
> > instead of the partitioned table.
> >
>
> This approach sounds reasonable to me. One minor point:
> +/*
> + * Check that replica identity matches.
> + *
>
Hi hackers,
I saw a problem in logical replication, when the target table on subscriber is a
partitioned table, it only checks whether the Replica Identity of partitioned
table is consistent with the publisher, and doesn't check Replica Identity of
the partition.
For example:
-- publisher --
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 1:14 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> The attached v18 patch has the fixes for the same.
>
Thanks for updating the patch, here are some comments.
0002 patch
==
1.
+
+origin (string)
+
+
It maybe better if the type of "origin" parameter
On Tue, May 10, 2022 5:43 PM Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 at 12:12, Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > Few comments on the patch:
> > 1. I think it is better to use DatumGetUInt32 to fetch the hash key as
> > the nearby code is using.
> > 2. You may want to change the below comment in
On Wed, May 25, 2022 7:55 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> The attached v16 patch has the changes for the same.
>
Thanks for updating the patch.
Some comments for the document in 0002 patch.
1.
+
+Lock the required tables in node1 and
+node2 till the setup is completed.
+
+
+
+
On Tue, May 24, 2022 1:34 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v15 patch has the fixes for the same.
>
Thanks for updating the patch. I have a comment on the document in 0002 patch.
@@ -300,6 +310,11 @@ CREATE SUBSCRIPTION subscription_namefalse.
+
On Wed, May 4, 2022 2:47 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v13 patch has the changes for the same.
>
Here are some comments on v13-0002 patch.
1)
+* Throw an error so that the user can take care of the initial
data
+* copying and
On Wed, May 4, 2022 2:47 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v13 patch has the changes for the same.
>
Thanks for your patch. Here are some comments on v13-0001 patch.
1)
@@ -152,6 +152,18 @@ CREATE SUBSCRIPTION subscription_name
+
+
On Sat, May 14, 2022 9:33 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v5 patch has the changes for the
> same. Also I have made the changes for SKIP Table based on the new
> syntax, the changes for the same are available in
>
On Mon, May 16, 2022 8:34 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Attach the new version patch.
>
Thanks for your patch. Here are some comments:
1. (0001 patch)
/*
* Returns Oids of tables in a publication.
*/
Datum
pg_get_publication_tables(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
Should we modify the comment of
On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 2:16 PM Wang, Wei/王 威 wrote:
>
> Attach the new patches.[suggestions by Amit-San]
> The patch for HEAD:
> 1. Add a new function to get tables info by a publications array.
> The patch for REL14:
> 1. Use an alias to make the statement understandable. BTW, I adjusted the
>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 3:05 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wang, Wei/王 威
> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:08 AM
> >
> > On Thur, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:08 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > When reviewing some logical replication related
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 2:23 PM vignesh C wrote:
>
> The patch does not apply on top of HEAD because of the recent commit,
> attached patch is rebased on top of HEAD.
>
Thanks for your patch. Here are some comments for 0001 patch.
1. doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
@@ -6438,6 +6438,15 @@
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 3:54 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Rebase the patch because the commit d5a9d86d in current HEAD.
>
Thanks for your patch, I tried this patch and confirmed that there is no timeout
problem after applying this patch, and I could reproduce this problem on HEAD.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 5:15 PM Hou, Zhijie/侯 志杰 wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comment.
> Attach the new version patch with this change.
>
Hi,
I did a performance test for this patch to see if it affects performance when
publishing empty transactions, based on the v32 patch.
In this test, I use
On Thursday, March 24, 2022 11:19 AM Hou, Zhijie/侯 志杰
wrote:
>
> 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
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 4:23 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've attached an updated version patch.
>
Thanks for updating the patch. Here are some comments for the v15 patch.
1. src/backend/replication/logical/worker.c
+ * to skip applying the changes when starting to apply changes. The
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 5:08 AM Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 3/12/22 05:30, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> ...
> >
> > Okay, please find attached. I have done basic testing of this, if we
> > agree with this approach then this will require some more testing.
> >
>
> Thanks, the proposed changes seem like a
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 4:20 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> I've attached an updated version patch. This patch can be applied on
> top of the latest disable_on_error patch[1].
>
Thanks for your patch. Here are some comments for the v13 patch.
1. doc/src/sgml/ref/alter_subscription.sgml
+
On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 9:41 AM Ajin Cherian wrote:
>
> I have split the patch into two. I have kept the logic of skipping
> streaming changes in the second patch.
> I will work on the second patch once we can figure out a solution for
> the COMMIT PREPARED after restart problem.
>
Thanks for
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 5:39 PM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> Attached an updated patch v26.
>
Thanks for your patch. A comment on the document.
@@ -7771,6 +7771,16 @@ SCRAM-SHA-256$iteration
count:
+ subdisableonerr bool
+
+
+ If true, the
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 10:40 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 5:42 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2022, at 8:45 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >
> > While working on the column filtering patch, which touches about the
> > same places, I noticed two minor gaps in testing:
Hi,
A comments on the v26 patch.
The following document about pg_stat_subscription_stats view only says that
"showing statistics about errors", should we add something about transactions
here?
pg_stat_subscription_statspg_stat_subscription_stats
One row per subscription,
Hi,
Here are some comments on the v21 patch.
1.
+ WalSndKeepalive(false, 0);
Maybe we can use InvalidXLogRecPtr here, instead of 0.
2.
+ pq_sendint64(_message, writePtr ? writePtr : sentPtr);
Similarly, should we use XLogRecPtrIsInvalid()?
3.
@@ -1183,6 +1269,20
On Tuesday, October 19, 2021 10:47 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
>
> On Monday, October 18, 2021 5:03 PM Amit Langote
> wrote:
> > I can imagine that the behavior seen here may look surprising, but not
> > sure if I would call it a bug as such. I do remember thinking about
> > this case
> I don't think here we need to restart to get a stable list of indexes
> as we do in RelationGetIndexAttrBitmap. The reason is here we build
> the cache entry using a historic snapshot and all the later changes
> are absorbed while decoding WAL. I have updated that and modified few
> comments in
Shi, Yu/侍 雨 将撤回邮件“Could you help testing logical replication?”。
Shi, Yu/侍 雨 将撤回邮件“Could you help testing logical replication?”。
Sorry for sending a wrong mail. Please ignore it.
> -Original Message-
> From: Shi, Yu/侍 雨
> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 6:51 PM
> To: Tang, Haiying/唐 海英
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
> Subject: RE: Could you help testing logical replication?
>
> > Then I get timeout error
> Then I get timeout error occurs and the subscriber worker keep re-launching
> over and over (you did not mention see such errors?)
I test again and get errors, too. I didn't check log after timeout in the
previous test.
Regards,
Tang
> Attached a patch which attempts to fix this by moving the cancellation
> cancelling request after processing results.
Thank you for your fixing. I tested and the problem has been solved after
applying your patch.
Regards,
Shi yu
Hi
I met a problem after commit 3a51306722.
While executing a SQL statement with psql, I can't interrupt it by pressing
ctrl+c.
For example:
postgres=# insert into test select generate_series(1,1000);
^C^CINSERT 0 1000
Press ctrl+c before finishing INSERT, and psql still continuing
> BTW, it seems better to add a testcase for this ?
I think the test for it can be added in
src/test/subscription/t/003_constraints.pl, which is like what in my patch.
Regards,
Shi yu
tests_for_table_refer_leak.diff
Description: tests_for_table_refer_leak.diff
101 - 136 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
