Re: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani(at)google(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication
Date: 2024-09-02 04:42:37
Message-ID: CAA4eK1+PGg=9n1Dvjznf+fqUL_fGE4S9e928JpmWyE+CC4g+eg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 3:06 PM Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Next I am planning to test solely on the logical decoding side and
> will share the results.
>

Thanks, the next set of proposed tests makes sense to me. It will also
be useful to generate some worst-case scenarios where the number of
invalidations is more to see the distribution cost in such cases. For
example, Truncate/Drop a table with 100 or 1000 partitions.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message reddy manjunath 2024-09-02 04:55:45 Regarding canditate_restart_lsn in logical decoding.
Previous Message shveta malik 2024-09-02 03:43:48 Re: DOCS - pg_replication_slot . Fix the 'inactive_since' description