From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication |
Date: | 2023-11-19 01:22:09 |
Message-ID: | CALDaNm2JHV5iv8OC-o2UJB3-qSK6CNZ5K_5XfBRjUsJOkqXS5A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 at 19:26, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 at 12:23, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> >
>
> > Note: actually, this would be OK if we are able to keep the OIDs of
> > the subscribers consistent across upgrades? I'm OK to not do nothing
> > about that in this patch, to keep it simpler. Just asking in passing.
>
> I will analyze more on this and post the analysis in the subsequent mail.
I analyzed further and felt that retaining subscription oid would be
cleaner as subscription/subscription_rel/replication_origin/replication_origin_status
all of these will be using the same oid as earlier and also probably
help in supporting upgrade of subscription in more scenarios later.
Here is a patch to handle the same.
Regards,
Vignesh
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
upgrade_retain_subscription_oid.patch | text/x-patch | 4.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | vignesh C | 2023-11-19 01:26:05 | Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication |
Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2023-11-19 01:17:29 | Re: Assert failure on 'list_member_ptr(rel->joininfo, restrictinfo)' |