Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 12/05/17 15:02, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 5/9/17 11:43, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> Here is rebased version of the other patch (the interface rework). I >> also fixed the tab completion there. > > Committed. > > One small thing I changed, to make it look more like CREATE/ALTER TABLE, > is that

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 5/9/17 11:43, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Here is rebased version of the other patch (the interface rework). I > also fixed the tab completion there. Committed. One small thing I changed, to make it look more like CREATE/ALTER TABLE, is that the CREATE commands use WITH (...) but the ALTER commands

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 09/05/17 16:28, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 5/9/17 04:39, Petr Jelinek wrote: What we want to simulate instead is an "auto" dependency of the slot on the subscription. So you can drop the slot separately (subject to other restrictions), and it is dropped automatically when the

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 5/9/17 03:27, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > I think we should change tab-completion support for that as well. > > diff --git a/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c b/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c > index 183fc37..046fdd5 100644 > --- a/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c > +++ b/src/bin/psql/tab-complete.c > @@

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 5/9/17 04:39, Petr Jelinek wrote: >>> What we want to simulate instead is an "auto" dependency of the slot on >>> the subscription. So you can drop the slot separately (subject to other >>> restrictions), and it is dropped automatically when the subscription is >>> dropped. To avoid that, you

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 09/05/17 11:44, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> On 09/05/17 10:51, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Petr Jelinek >>> wrote: On 09/05/17 07:07, Peter

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 09/05/17 10:51, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Petr Jelinek >> wrote: >>> On 09/05/17 07:07, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 5/8/17 23:23, Peter

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 09/05/17 10:51, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> On 09/05/17 07:07, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> On 5/8/17 23:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: The way this uses RESTRICT and CASCADE appears to be backwards from its

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 09/05/17 07:07, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 5/8/17 23:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> The way this uses RESTRICT and CASCADE appears to be backwards from its >>> usual meaning. Normally, CASCADE when

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 09/05/17 07:07, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 5/8/17 23:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> The way this uses RESTRICT and CASCADE appears to be backwards from its >> usual meaning. Normally, CASCADE when dropping an object that is still >> used by others will cause those other objects to be

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 5/8/17 23:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> The way this uses RESTRICT and CASCADE appears to be backwards from its >> usual meaning. Normally, CASCADE when dropping an object that is still >> used by

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 5/8/17 23:23, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > The way this uses RESTRICT and CASCADE appears to be backwards from its > usual meaning. Normally, CASCADE when dropping an object that is still > used by others will cause those other objects to be dropped. The > equivalent here would be DROP

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 5/8/17 17:55, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 08/05/17 22:55, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 5/5/17 13:01, Petr Jelinek wrote: >>> What do you think of attached. I actually did add RESTRICT/CASCADE, in a >>> way that if there is slot RESTRICT will refuse to drop subscription and >>> CASCADE will try to

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 08/05/17 22:55, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 5/5/17 13:01, Petr Jelinek wrote: >> What do you think of attached. I actually did add RESTRICT/CASCADE, in a >> way that if there is slot RESTRICT will refuse to drop subscription and >> CASCADE will try to drop it. Still all errors. >> >> The new

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 5/5/17 13:01, Petr Jelinek wrote: > What do you think of attached. I actually did add RESTRICT/CASCADE, in a > way that if there is slot RESTRICT will refuse to drop subscription and > CASCADE will try to drop it. Still all errors. > > The new way to not drop slot is to set slot_name to NONE

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 15:31, Tom Lane wrote: > Petr Jelinek writes: >> Let me expand, if we don't drop the slot by default when dropping >> subscription, we'll have a lot of users with dead slots laying around >> holding back WAL/catalog_xmin, that's really bad. If we do drop

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 04/05/17 23:29, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:38 AM, Petr Jelinek >> wrote: >>> Ok, Let me be clear, I actually happen to agree with your proposal. The >>> reason I am moaning is that I always seem to

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:38 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> Ok, Let me be clear, I actually happen to agree with your proposal. The >> reason I am moaning is that I always seem to find myself doing tons of >> mechanical

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:38 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > Ok, Let me be clear, I actually happen to agree with your proposal. The > reason I am moaning is that I always seem to find myself doing tons of > mechanical work to rewrite some cosmetic aspect of some patch

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 16:14, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 02/05/17 15:31, Tom Lane wrote: >> Petr Jelinek writes: >>> Let me expand, if we don't drop the slot by default when dropping >>> subscription, we'll have a lot of users with dead slots laying around >>> holding back

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 18:25, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Petr Jelinek wrote: >> On 02/05/17 18:00, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera >>> wrote: Petr Jelinek wrote: > So the only way to fulfill the requirement you stated is to just not try

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 22:40, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> That sounds okay. I know PeterE didn't like the lower case and >> underscore separated words for options in the original patch, so I'd >> like to hear his opinion on

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: >> > 2) don't drop because we know it won't work. I see two options: >> >c) ignore a drop slot failure,

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > 2) don't drop because we know it won't work. I see two options: > >c) ignore a drop slot failure, i.e. don't cause a transaction abort. > > An easy way to implement this is just

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > That sounds okay. I know PeterE didn't like the lower case and > underscore separated words for options in the original patch, so I'd > like to hear his opinion on this. I am not sure how much advantage is > there

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 19:42, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> I am happy to implement something different, it's quite trivial to >> change. But I am not going to propose anything different as I can't >> think of better syntax (if I

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > I am happy to implement something different, it's quite trivial to > change. But I am not going to propose anything different as I can't > think of better syntax (if I could I would have done it). I don't like >

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > 2) don't drop because we know it won't work. I see two options: >c) ignore a drop slot failure, i.e. don't cause a transaction abort. > An easy way to implement this is just add a PG_TRY block, but we >

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 02/05/17 18:00, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera > > wrote: > >> Petr Jelinek wrote: > >>> So the only way to fulfill the requirement you stated is to just not try > >>> to drop the slot, ever, on DROP

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 18:00, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: >> Petr Jelinek wrote: >>> So the only way to fulfill the requirement you stated is to just not try >>> to drop the slot, ever, on DROP SUBSCRIPTION. That makes the default

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Petr Jelinek wrote: >> So the only way to fulfill the requirement you stated is to just not try >> to drop the slot, ever, on DROP SUBSCRIPTION. That makes the default >> behavior leave resources on upstream that

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Petr Jelinek wrote: > So the only way to fulfill the requirement you stated is to just not try > to drop the slot, ever, on DROP SUBSCRIPTION. That makes the default > behavior leave resources on upstream that will eventually cause that > server to stop unless user notices before. I think we

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 15:31, Tom Lane wrote: > Petr Jelinek writes: >> Let me expand, if we don't drop the slot by default when dropping >> subscription, we'll have a lot of users with dead slots laying around >> holding back WAL/catalog_xmin, that's really bad. If we do drop

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 05/02/2017 05:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Robert Haas writes: On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; Having said that, I doubt that anyone would argue that CREATE USER is anything but

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Petr Jelinek writes: > Let me expand, if we don't drop the slot by default when dropping > subscription, we'll have a lot of users with dead slots laying around > holding back WAL/catalog_xmin, that's really bad. If we do drop by > default like now, we need option to

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 15:14, Petr Jelinek wrote: > On 02/05/17 15:10, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas writes: On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; >> I'm pretty uninspired by this

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 15:10, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek >>> wrote: DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; > >>> I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. > > Actually, this command

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek >> wrote: >>> DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; >> I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. Actually, this command has got much worse problems than whether you

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 02/05/17 14:13, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek >> wrote: >>> DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; > >> I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. Logical replication >> seems to

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On 2 May 2017 at 12:55, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; > > I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. Logical replication > seems to have added a whole

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

Robert Haas writes: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek > wrote: >> DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; > I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. Logical replication > seems to have added a whole bunch of syntax that

Re: [HACKERS] logical replication syntax (was DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling)

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote: > DROP SUBSCRIPTION mysub NODROP SLOT; I'm pretty uninspired by this choice of syntax. Logical replication seems to have added a whole bunch of syntax that involves prefixing words with "no". In various places,