MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAFPTHDa5aP8ixTZBygGAe48E1N=DvuPzcXikw7bNKixLMN3pVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <OS9PR01MB12149E188221BED862E4BE9E0F5342@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CALDaNm2-uwpbJ8fnrssp+hORvOutsqRoZAsa05xVVzXe5Bt3bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDaNLRqPAda1RUDVfSDH7eLTaONv0UEmc9H5sdMW1Li2Bg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN4CZFOb3urMsLPsEyVrYR7-7yA+BC5kDgQQd0nAQ8xj2zyRcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDYqpuZ6o2-HuCJDYqJ7GY3+zV+Xo-gT7PAgi4Bkz+oTxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN4CZFN4oLdxLwUXHUPV-5mFmK+4dcnppP00fV3i4qmMYCAkGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDbBiTfjYkQwYTNA2a4LRp8Sp7_zB59fmV0R7977ztxgmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDaftSwzGTGbFEw8rwDBsub0XqcDm1wxQcquj-Y3PC2qrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANhcyEVercsNbgC5CTkMNzh_w_Jv1uK7RQg9vEvAeNQhoBHCKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJpy0uAXynzWr4w_9GkJC3i=LL9WsRCZYVWAV0PgKmgs8riWzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPTHDavPyxsWjK0cRO3yOaP4u8FGYrOJuXJB-4wzneAY3H3Ug@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANhcyEVFSutXXdt_0XMCD37NE7Yd7ROdDVEE06D8YVyPNEBFHg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CANhcyEVFSutXXdt_0XMCD37NE7Yd7ROdDVEE06D8YVyPNEBFHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 09:47:51 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <CAJpy0uDtXbK=enJh=kgOyah4LxnmsjYQwTJE0Cv-=wpXo1MP_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Preserve replication origin OIDs in pg_upgrade
To: Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>
Cc: Ajin Cherian <itsajin@gmail.com>,
 Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona.com>,
	vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>,
 "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uDtXbK%3DenJh%3DkgOyah4LxnmsjYQwTJE0Cv-%3DwpXo1MP_A%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 10:36=E2=80=AFPM Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Ajin,
> I have reviewed the patch and here are some comments:
>
> 1. I want to clarify, what is the expected behaviour when we upgrade
> the postgres instance from version <=3D 16 to "HEAD + patch"?
> -   ReplicationOriginNameForLogicalRep(subid, InvalidOid, originname,
> sizeof(originname));
> -   replorigin_create(originname);
> +   if (!IsBinaryUpgrade)
> +   {
> +       ReplicationOriginNameForLogicalRep(subid, InvalidOid,
> originname, sizeof(originname));
> +       replorigin_create(originname);
> +   }
> and
> +           /* Dump replication origins */
> +           if (server_version >=3D 170000 && binary_upgrade &&
> archDumpFormat =3D=3D archNull)
> +               dumpReplicationOrigins(conn);
>
> When the postgres instance with subscription is updated from PG 16 (or
> less) to HEAD, the replication origin is created as we do not have "if
> (!IsBinaryUpgrade)" check in HEAD,
> whereas when the similar instance is upgraded to "HEAD + patch", no
> replication origin is present after the upgrade.
> Is this difference in the behaviour between HEAD and "HEAD + patch" expec=
ted?
>

Good catch Shlok. IMO, the behaviour should be same even if we upgrade
to HEAD+patch, it should not result in the loss of origins.

thanks
Shveta