public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
To: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
Cc: Rahila Syed <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Smith <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2022 13:11:58 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OS0PR01MB57164514E1DE1E579B0B6C46940F9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1KONbrck=hQTFSFgwio5rqu-82KZba2HLE_AcVa_RWYcQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1JyoVty_BZOMJdx7VMkBTadvv8oOYrh9xTQ5BY+k-3+OA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1JJ5qgqbjfYQU9F4R1+OABxec-DQechQXus0fanDjaAVg@mail.gmail.com>
<OS0PR01MB571614E4A39DD33669D5AFD6940A9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1J9UDnM-xN7viu4eO_DDL_PqMG9F6ZsskqEU7snujXi+A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1KUpOnFam+2bBuGGX-_pZbmO_ShJV6G=GT-RyM7gQSvWg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<OS0PR01MB57164514E1DE1E579B0B6C46940F9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
On 3/14/22 12:12, [email protected] wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 5:08 AM Tomas Vondra <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/12/22 05:30, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>
>>> Okay, please find attached. I have done basic testing of this, if we
>>> agree with this approach then this will require some more testing.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, the proposed changes seem like a clear improvement, so I've
>> added them, with some minor tweaks (mostly to comments).
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for updating the patches !
> And sorry for the row filter bug caused by my mistake.
>
> I looked at the two fixup patches. I am thinking would it be better if we
> add one testcase for these two bugs? Maybe like the attachment.
>
Yeah, a test would be nice - I'll take a look later.
Anyway, the fix does not address tablesync, as explained in [1]. I'm not
sure what to do about it - in principle, we could calculate which
relations to sync, and then eliminate "duplicates" (i.e. relations where
we are going to sync an ancestor).
regards
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/822a8e40-287c-59ff-0ea9-35eb759f4fe6%40enterprisedb.com
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
view thread (31+ messages) latest in thread
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox