On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-01-28 16:55:52 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
If your using non-surragate /natural primary keys this tends to come up
occasionally due to data-entry errors or renames. I'm looking at this from
the point of view
On 2013-01-28 16:55:52 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
If your using non-surragate /natural primary keys this tends to come up
occasionally due to data-entry errors or renames. I'm looking at this from
the point of view of what do I need to use this as a source for a production
replication system
On 2013-01-26 16:20:33 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
On 13-01-24 11:15 AM, Steve Singer wrote:
On 13-01-24 06:40 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Fair enough. I am also working on a user of this infrastructure but that
doesn't help you very much. Steve Singer seemed to make some stabs at
writing an
Hi,
On 2013-01-27 23:07:51 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
A few more comments;
In decode.c DecodeDelete
+ if (r-xl_len = (SizeOfHeapDelete + SizeOfHeapHeader))
+ {
+ elog(DEBUG2, huh, no primary key for a delete on wal_level =
logical?);
+ return;
+ }
+
I think we
On 2013-01-27 12:28:21 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
On 13-01-22 11:30 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
I pushed a new rebased version (the xlogreader commit made it annoying
to merge).
The main improvements are
* way much coherent code internally for intializing logical rep
* explicit control
On 13-01-28 06:17 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
3. Pass the delete (with no key values) onto the replication client and let
it deal with it (see 1 and 2)
Hm.
While I agree that nicer behaviour would be good I think the real
enforcement should happen on a higher level, e.g. with event triggers
On 13-01-28 06:23 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
The CF is also there to find UI warts and such, so something like this
seems perfectly fine. Even moreso as it doesn't look this will get
into 9.3 anyway. I wanted to add such an option, but I was too
lazy^Wbusy to think about the sematics. Your
On 2013-01-28 12:23:02 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-27 12:28:21 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
On 13-01-22 11:30 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
I pushed a new rebased version (the xlogreader commit made it annoying
to merge).
The main improvements are
* way much coherent
On 13-01-22 11:30 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
I pushed a new rebased version (the xlogreader commit made it annoying
to merge).
The main improvements are
* way much coherent code internally for intializing logical rep
* explicit control over slots
* options for logical replication
Exactly
On 13-01-24 11:15 AM, Steve Singer wrote:
On 13-01-24 06:40 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Fair enough. I am also working on a user of this infrastructure but that
doesn't help you very much. Steve Singer seemed to make some stabs at
writing an output plugin as well. Steve, how far did you get
On 13-01-24 11:15 AM, Steve Singer wrote:
On 13-01-24 06:40 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Fair enough. I am also working on a user of this infrastructure but that
doesn't help you very much. Steve Singer seemed to make some stabs at
writing an output plugin as well. Steve, how far did you get
On 24 January 2013 01:17, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree. The thing that scares me about the logical replication stuff
is not that it might be slow (and if your numbers are to be believed,
it isn't), but that I suspect it's riddled with bugs and possibly some
questionable
On 24.01.2013 00:30, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
I decided to reply on the patches thread to be able to find this later.
On 2013-01-23 22:48:50 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
logical changeset generation v4
This is a boatload of infrastructure for supporting logical replication, yet
we have no
Hi Robert, Hi all,
On 2013-01-23 20:17:04 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The only reason the submitted version of logical decoding is
comparatively slow is that its xmin update policy is braindamaged,
working on that
One random thing that caught my eye in the patch, I though I'd mention
it while I still remember: In heap_delete, you call heap_form_tuple() in
a critical section. That's a bad idea, because if it runs out of memory
- PANIC.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 2013-01-24 12:38:25 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 24.01.2013 00:30, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
I decided to reply on the patches thread to be able to find this later.
On 2013-01-23 22:48:50 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
logical changeset generation v4
This is a boatload of
On 13-01-24 06:40 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Fair enough. I am also working on a user of this infrastructure but that
doesn't help you very much. Steve Singer seemed to make some stabs at
writing an output plugin as well. Steve, how far did you get there?
I was able to get something that
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Thats way much more along the lines of what I am afraid of than the
performance stuff - but Heikki cited those, so I replied to that.
Note that I didn't say this must, must go in - I just don't think
Heikki's
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
Now, the bad news is, I don't think it's very reasonable to try to
commit this to 9.3. I think it is just too much stuff too late in the
cycle. I've reviewed some of the patches from time to time but there
is a lot more stuff and it's big and
On 24.01.2013 20:27, Robert Haas wrote:
Before getting bogged down in technical commentary, let me say this
very clearly: I am enormously grateful for your work on this project.
Logical replication based on WAL decoding is a feature of enormous
value that PostgreSQL has needed for a long time,
Hi!
On 2013-01-24 13:27:00 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Before getting bogged down in technical commentary, let me say this
very clearly: I am enormously grateful for your work on this project.
Logical replication
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:16:09AM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
What I am afraid though is that it basically goes on like this in the
next commitfests:
* 9.4-CF1: no serious reviewer comments because they are busy doing release
work
* 9.4-CF2: all are relieved that the release is over and a
On 2013-01-19 23:42:02 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
5) Currently its only allowed to access catalog tables, its fairly
trivial to extend this to additional tables if you can accept some
(noticeable but not too big) overhead for modifications on those tables.
I was thinking of making that an
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
With the (attached for convenience) patch applied you can do
# ALTER TABLE replication_metadata SET (treat_as_catalog_table = true);
to enable this.
What I wonder about is:
* does anybody have a better name for the
On 2013-01-23 10:18:50 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
With the (attached for convenience) patch applied you can do
# ALTER TABLE replication_metadata SET (treat_as_catalog_table = true);
to enable this.
What I
Hi,
I decided to reply on the patches thread to be able to find this later.
On 2013-01-23 22:48:50 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
logical changeset generation v4
This is a boatload of infrastructure for supporting logical replication, yet
we have no code actually implementing logical
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
pgbench upstream:
tps: 22275.941409
space overhead: 0%
pgbench logical-submitted
tps: 16274.603046
space overhead: 2.1%
pgbench logical-HEAD (will submit updated version tomorrow or so):
tps: 20853.341551
space
On 01/23/2013 05:17 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Of course, I have no evidence that that will happen. But it is a
really big piece of code, and therefore unless you are superman, it's
probably got a really large number of bugs. The scary thing is that
it is not as if we can say, well, this is a
Hi,
I pushed a new rebased version (the xlogreader commit made it annoying
to merge).
The main improvements are
* way much coherent code internally for intializing logical rep
* explicit control over slots
* options for logical replication
On 2013-01-19 23:42:02 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
On
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Makes sense?
Yes. The catalog timetravel stuff still gives me heartburn. The idea
of treating system catalogs in a special way has never sat well with
me and still doesn't - not that I am sure what I'd like better.
On 2013-01-20 21:45:11 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Makes sense?
Yes. The catalog timetravel stuff still gives me heartburn. The idea
of treating system catalogs in a special way has never sat well with
me and
On 13-01-14 08:38 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is the newest version of logical changeset generation.
2) Currently the logical replication infrastructure assigns a 'slot-id'
when a new replica is setup. That slot id isn't really nice
(e.g. id-321578-3). It also requires that
Andres Freund wrote:
[09] Adjust all *Satisfies routines to take a HeapTuple instead of a
HeapTupleHeader
For timetravel access to the catalog we need to be able to lookup (cmin,
cmax) pairs of catalog rows when were 'inside' that TX. This patch just
adapts the signature of the *Satisfies
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I had a look at this part. Running the regression tests unveiled a case
where the tableOid wasn't being set (and thus caused an assertion to
fail), so I added that. I also noticed that the additions to
pruneheap.c are sometimes filling a tuple before it's strictly
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
[09] Adjust all *Satisfies routines to take a HeapTuple instead of a
HeapTupleHeader
For timetravel access to the catalog we need to be able to lookup (cmin,
cmax) pairs of catalog rows
On 2013-01-18 11:48:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
[09] Adjust all *Satisfies routines to take a HeapTuple instead of a
HeapTupleHeader
For timetravel access to the catalog we need to
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I took a quick look at this and am just curious why we're adding the
requirement that t_tableOid has to be initialized?
I assume he meant it had been left at a random value, which is surely
bad practice even if a specific usage doesn't fall over today.
On 2013-01-15 17:41:50 +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 15/01/13 17:37, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 15/01/13 14:38, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is the newest version of logical changeset generation.
I'm quite interested in this feature - so tried applying the 19 patches to
On 2013-01-15 01:00:00 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
I've been giving a couple of these parts a look. In particular
[03] Split out xlog reading into its own module called xlogreader
Cleaned this one up a bit last week. I will polish it some more,
publish for some
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-15 01:00:00 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
I've been giving a couple of these parts a look. In particular
[03] Split out xlog reading into its own module called xlogreader
Cleaned this one up a bit last week. I will polish it
On 2013-01-15 09:56:41 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-15 01:00:00 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
I've been giving a couple of these parts a look. In particular
[03] Split out xlog reading into its own module called xlogreader
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-01-15 09:56:41 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Oh, hm. Maybe the contrib module's make installcheck, then?
Thats what I do right now, but I really would prefer to have it checked
during normal make checks, installchecks aren't run all that
On 2013-01-15 10:28:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-01-15 09:56:41 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Oh, hm. Maybe the contrib module's make installcheck, then?
Thats what I do right now, but I really would prefer to have it checked
during
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
But the other part of the problem is hiding in the unfortunately removed
part of the problem description - the tests require the non-default
options wal_level=logical and max_logical_slots=3+.
Oh. Well, that's not going to work.
Is there a
On 2013-01-15 11:10:22 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
But the other part of the problem is hiding in the unfortunately removed
part of the problem description - the tests require the non-default
options wal_level=logical and max_logical_slots=3+.
Oh.
Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On 2013-01-15 11:10:22 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I think the only reasonable way to handle this would be to (1) make
make installcheck a no-op in this contrib module, and (2) make
make check work, being careful to start the test postmaster with
the
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-15 09:56:41 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-15 01:00:00 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
I've been giving a couple of these parts a look. In particular
[03] Split out xlog reading into its
On 2013-01-15 15:16:44 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-15 09:56:41 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-01-15 01:00:00 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
I've been giving a couple of these parts a look. In
Andreas,
Is there a git fork for logical replication somewhere?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com schrieb:
Andreas,
Is there a git fork for logical replication somewhere?
Check the bottom of the email ;)
---
Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
At 2013-01-14 18:15:39 -0800, j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Is there a git fork for logical replication somewhere?
git://git.postgresql.org/git/users/andresfreund/postgres.git, branch
xlog-decoding-rebasing-cf4 (and xlogreader_v4).
-- Abhijit
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
At 2013-01-15 02:38:45 +0100, and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
2) Currently the logical replication infrastructure assigns a
'slot-id' when a new replica is setup. That slot id isn't really
nice (e.g. id-321578-3). It also requires that [18] keeps state
in a global variable to make writing
Andres Freund wrote:
I've been giving a couple of these parts a look. In particular
[03] Split out xlog reading into its own module called xlogreader
Cleaned this one up a bit last week. I will polish it some more,
publish for some final comments, and commit.
[08] wal_decoding: Introduce
On 15/01/13 14:38, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is the newest version of logical changeset generation.
I'm quite interested in this feature - so tried applying the 19 patches
to the latest 9.3 checkout. Patch and compile are good.
However portals seem busted:
bench=# BEGIN;
On 15/01/13 17:37, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 15/01/13 14:38, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is the newest version of logical changeset generation.
I'm quite interested in this feature - so tried applying the 19
patches to the latest 9.3 checkout. Patch and compile are good.
55 matches
Mail list logo
