Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 14:03:30 -0500
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fabr=EDzio?= de Royes Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com>
Cc: petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com,
	Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com.br>,
	Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, hironobu@interdb.jp
Subject: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Message-ID: <20181123190330.GI3415@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: 
 <CAHE3wggb715X+mK_DitLXF25B=jE6xyNCH4YOwM860JR7HarGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHE3wgiHOdFHcEpm_w5f8vAXiugDmTciTiegNGVktezMbFkkrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7106a0fc-8017-c0fe-a407-9466c9407ff8@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAHE3wggWAtbT+Yt_MDy0uQwZcc6x820OwHp3_TBtAqtBeW4+Ug@mail.gmail.com>
 <92e5587d-28b8-5849-2374-5ca3863256f1@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAFcNs+q88Z--uHbcii80r-pBWByEVNbc1nPyN8iHHKhCHCtzrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <466cdec7-92a0-41c0-b74a-ec0be94d4451@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CAFcNs+pA9ywYJbf940UFXW5B5i+An3=0yzxC8_bXubu+CsOQ=A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="60m8Ey44SH8YQcXf"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAFcNs+pA9ywYJbf940UFXW5B5i+An3=0yzxC8_bXubu+CsOQ=A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk


--60m8Ey44SH8YQcXf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Greetings,

* Fabr=EDzio de Royes Mello (fabriziomello@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 4:13 PM Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.co=
m>
> wrote:
> > > If carefully documented I see no problem with it... we already have an
> > > analogous problem with functional indexes.
> >
> > The difference is that with functional indexes you can recreate the
> > missing object and everything is okay again. With logical replication
> > recreating the object will not help.
> >
>=20
> In this case with logical replication you should rsync the object. That is
> the price of misunderstanding / bad use of the new feature.
>=20
> As usual, there are no free beer ;-)

There's also certainly no shortage of other ways to break logical
replication, including ways that would also be hard to recover from
today other than doing a full resync.

What that seems to indicate, to me at least, is that it'd be awful nice
to have a way to resync the data which doesn't necessairly involve
transferring all of it over again.

Of course, it'd be nice if we could track those dependencies too,
but that's yet another thing.

In short, I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that we shouldn't
allow this and instead I'd rather we realize it and put the logical
replication into some kind of an error state that requires a resync.

Thanks!

Stephen

--60m8Ey44SH8YQcXf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=hw7D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--60m8Ey44SH8YQcXf--