On 14/04/16 20:46, Robert Haas wrote:
I believe
logical replication is a fundamental database technology that should
be considered just as much within the score of the core product as
physical replication, parallel query, or UPSERT.
Agreed, I believed we need this for very long time as well (pg
On 14/04/16 20:14, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 14 April 2016 at 00:48, Robert Haas wrote:
I think this would be a good topic to discuss at PGCon.
I'm not going to be able to be at PGCon, and I don't think Petr is either.
That's unfortunate in t
On 15 April 2016 at 02:14, Robert Haas wrote:
> That's a bummer. I suppose you won't be at NYC either?
>
I won't. I'm not sure about Petr.
It's over 24h travel, and costly, from Perth. So conference attendance is
unfortunately something I have to pick and choose about.
--
Craig Ringer
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> 1) "more deeply into core"
> I'm open to doing that for some parts of the code, if there is benefit. At
> present, an extension has exactly the same attributes as an in-core
> solution, so I don't currently see any benefit in doing so. Could y
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 14 April 2016 at 00:48, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think this would be a good topic to discuss at PGCon.
>
> I'm not going to be able to be at PGCon, and I don't think Petr is either.
> That's unfortunate in terms of planning for this.
That'
On 04/14/2016 08:57 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 14 April 2016 at 16:52, Andres Freund mailto:and...@anarazel.de>> wrote:
> If we aren't going to talk about changes in advance, then multiple
> commit rights is a recipe for conflict, not a better way at all.
Obviously we should discuss
On 04/14/2016 08:52 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
I think there's quite a bit of work needed all around. The output
plugin's protocol needs some work, the whole catalog infrastructure and
management in pglogical itself needs a lot of work.
+1 and let's not forget a need for comprehensive documentat
On 04/14/2016 08:26 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 13 April 2016 at 17:48, Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs mailto:si...@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote:
> Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not?
I ha
Hi,
On 2016-04-14 08:52:00 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Petr is more than capable for managing bug fixes and I would like to see
> > him have his chance to demonstrate his skill and get a shot at being a
> > committer, just as you did. Having one person manage a feature seems like
> > the best
On 14 April 2016 at 16:52, Andres Freund wrote:
> > If we aren't going to talk about changes in advance, then multiple
> > commit rights is a recipe for conflict, not a better way at all.
>
> Obviously we should discuss design bits, I don't see how that's a
> conflict.
>
If everything is going
Hi,
On 2016-04-14 16:42:10 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> What intense work is required? pglogical already works, it just requires
> review.
I've done a round of reviews in January, still not all points are
addressed of yet (due to time limits afaik). At that pace it's
unrealistic to get anything i
On 14 April 2016 at 02:05, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2016-04-13 09:38:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > If we want this in 9.7
>
> I desperately want logical replication for 9.7. And I'm planning to put
> in a good chunk of work to make that happen in some way.
Good, thanks. I'm happy to
On 13 April 2016 at 17:48, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs
> wrote:
> > Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not?
>
> I haven't spent very much time on it yet. I tend to prefer the idea
> of integrating it more deeply into core a
On 04/13/2016 06:05 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2016-04-13 09:38:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
If we want this in 9.7
I desperately want logical replication for 9.7. And I'm planning to put
in a good chunk of work to make that happen in some way.
I don't see a need for it to be in -core
Hi,
On 2016-04-13 09:38:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> If we want this in 9.7
I desperately want logical replication for 9.7. And I'm planning to put
in a good chunk of work to make that happen in some way.
> we'll need lots of people's support, design commentary and assistance
> with bug fixin
On 14 April 2016 at 00:48, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> I think this would be a good topic to discuss at PGCon.
>
>
I'm not going to be able to be at PGCon, and I don't think Petr is either.
That's unfortunate in terms of planning for this.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.c
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not?
I haven't spent very much time on it yet. I tend to prefer the idea
of integrating it more deeply into core and adding SQL syntax around
it, but I'm not going to fight
At 2016-04-13 03:46:21 -0700, j...@commandprompt.com wrote:
>
> ALTER DATABASE ADD NODE;
> ALTER SCHEMA SUBSCRIBE ALL;
> CREATE REPLICATION SET;
>
> But I am unaware if that is possible within the constraints of the
> extensions API.
It is not possible.
-- Abhijit
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers ma
On 04/13/2016 01:38 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 12 April 2016 at 23:46, Joshua D. Drake mailto:j...@commandprompt.com>> wrote:
So what am I missing?
Thanks for the bug report, but unfortunately the CF is now over and
pglogical is not in 9.6. So its a little late for reviews and bug reports.
On 12 April 2016 at 23:46, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> So what am I missing?
>
Thanks for the bug report, but unfortunately the CF is now over and
pglogical is not in 9.6. So its a little late for reviews and bug reports.
I'm not sure of the exact status of pglogical now. It's has a good
receptio
20 matches
Mail list logo
