From: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Quan Zongliang <zongliang(dot)quan(at)postgresdata(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add a GUC variable that control logical replication |
Date: | 2019-10-19 22:23:36 |
Message-ID: | CAHE3wgij+1=UBPFgtSwJAFGsqJf89jw2oziM+pUgkK-zGx=hwQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em sáb, 19 de out de 2019 às 14:11, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> escreveu:
>
> On 2019-09-18 11:33, Quan Zongliang wrote:
> > On 2019/9/18 17:11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> Why do you need to turn off replication when there is "maintenance" on a
> >> table? What does that even mean?
> >>
> > In a table, the user only keep data for a period of time and delete
> > expired records every day, involving about 10 million to 20 million
> > records at a time. They want to not pass similar bulk operations in
> > logical replication.
>
> You can probably achieve that using ALTER PUBLICATION to disable
> publication of deletes or truncates, as the case may be, either
> permanently or just for the duration of the operations you want to skip.
>
... then you are skipping all tables in the publication. I think this
feature is not essential for unidirectional logical replication.
However, it is important for multi-master replication. Data
synchronization tool will generate transactions with rows that are
already in the other node(s) so those transactions can't be replicated
to avoid (expensive) conflicts.
--
Euler Taveira Timbira -
http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-10-20 04:53:57 | Re: Ordering of header file inclusion |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-10-19 21:14:19 | Re: Ordering of header file inclusion |