pg.ddx.io  pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>
To: Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_repack vs. running logical/physical replication
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:27:48 +0100
Message-ID: <5d541112fcf04486228714f200ed2b596bbb15f3.camel@cybertec.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANzqJaAXyw3bD4xi_UmOc2zFjaY7be1Tuf1-xfoqFXKaQ=kigQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANzqJaAvhK+82KyC=NJ6HGi3VhwHibSUAH2+b2T-3w9Ct4HbXQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+427g9yfibEe62upmOnW7On6ixwvQbXXiLLPwT8vKAQ9p3bYQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAo1mbkFD7yAARhf-oLf4ZuGSr3Xdi8-nYO=whAweKWTeTPVkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANzqJaB7sWG9PKJ3-=PXMwLRJEg9SNKmLcE_VxkBe-BxF=ijuQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<e8a8d645-3ac2-4673-a484-96c0dfb47bea@googlemail.com>
	<322e64e0-7cc4-4a1c-945b-64244b5c333e@cloud.gatewaynet.com>
	<CANzqJaAXyw3bD4xi_UmOc2zFjaY7be1Tuf1-xfoqFXKaQ=kigQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2024-01-29 at 20:00 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 2:27 PM Achilleas Mantzios <a.mantzios@cloud.gatewaynet.com> wrote:
> > Στις 29/1/24 16:56, ο/η Dirk Krautschick έγραψε:
> > > is there any good reason to cut of logical and/or physical replication 
> > > for the time pg_repack (please no discussion about pg_repack at all, 
> > > customer request, his idea, his strict wish) is running? I am not so 
> > > deep into how pg_repack is running things but as the docs are saying 
> > > it could affect hard at least the publications for logrep. Haven't 
> > > tested it yet and just hopeing for a quick answer here :-)
> > 
> > Why should logical replication break?
>  
> LR gets fiddly, and needs manual attention when DDL changes are applied, no?

Yes, but pg_repack doesn't change the table definition or contents, so it
should be able to work with logical replication.

I guess the question is if pg_repack WAL logs everything correctly.
If yes, I'd assume that it should work as well with logical replication
as VACUUM (FULL).

I guess you'd have to try it out, perhaps with a concurrent pgbench run.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe





view thread (4+ messages)

Message-ID: <5d541112fcf04486228714f200ed2b596bbb15f3.camel@cybertec.at>
Permalink:  ../5d541112fcf04486228714f200ed2b596bbb15f3.camel@cybertec.at/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/5d541112fcf04486228714f200ed2b596bbb15f3.camel@cybertec.at

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
  Cc: laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com, pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: pg_repack vs. running logical/physical replication
  In-Reply-To: <5d541112fcf04486228714f200ed2b596bbb15f3.camel@cybertec.at>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox