Re: Logical Replication of sequences

From: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Hou, Zhijie/侯 志杰 <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Logical Replication of sequences
Date: 2024-08-05 09:09:44
Message-ID: CALDaNm23DA-3VvD7Ao3QwEK_ris+7aaPWLjmX+2VH_nq9MUCGw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 14:33, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 2:24 PM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 9:26 AM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 4:17 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for reporting this, these issues are fixed in the attached
> > > > v20240730_2 version patch.
> > > >
> >
> > I was reviewing the design of patch003, and I have a query. Do we need
> > to even start an apply worker and create replication slot when
> > subscription created is for 'sequences only'? IIUC, currently logical
> > replication apply worker is the one launching sequence-sync worker
> > whenever needed. I think it should be the launcher doing this job and
> > thus apply worker may even not be needed for current functionality of
> > sequence sync? Going forward when we implement incremental sync of
> > sequences, then we may have apply worker started but now it is not
> > needed.
> >
>
> Also, can we please mention the state change and 'who does what' atop
> sequencesync.c file similar to what we have atop tablesync.c file
> otherwise it is difficult to figure out the flow.

I have added this in sequencesync.c file, the changes for the same are
available at v20240805_2 version patch at [1].
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm1kk1MHGk3BU_XTxay%3DdR6sMHnm4TT5cmVz2f_JXkWENQ%40mail.gmail.com

Regards,
Vignesh

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2024-08-05 10:16:20 Re: [BUG?] check_exclusion_or_unique_constraint false negative
Previous Message vignesh C 2024-08-05 09:06:37 Re: Logical Replication of sequences