Re: Logical Replication of sequences

On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 at 13:46, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Here are a few comments for patch v20240705-0003.
>
> (This is a WIP. I have only looked at the docs so far.)
>
> ======
> doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
>
> nitpick - max_logical_replication_workers: /and sequence
> synchornization worker/and a sequence synchornization worker/
>
> ======
> doc/src/sgml/logical-replication.sgml
>
> nitpick - max_logical_replication_workers: re-order list of workers to
> be consistent with other docs 1-apply,2-parallel,3-tablesync,4-seqsync
>
> ======
> doc/src/sgml/ref/alter_subscription.sgml
>
> 1.
> IIUC the existing "REFRESH PUBLICATION" command will fetch and sync
> all new sequences, etc., and/or remove old ones no longer in the
> publication. But current docs do not say anything at all about
> sequences here. It should say something about sequence behaviour.
>
> ~~~
>
> 2.
> For the existing "REFRESH PUBLICATION" there is a sub-option
> "copy_data=true/false". Won't this need some explanation about how it
> behaves for sequences? Or will there be another option
> "copy_sequences=true/false".
>
> ~~~
>
> 3.
> IIUC the main difference between REFRESH PUBLICATION and REFRESH
> PUBLICATION SEQUENCES is that the 2nd command will try synchronize
> with all the *existing* sequences to bring them to the same point as
> on the publisher, but otherwise, they are the same command. If that is
> correct understanding I don't think that distinction is made very
> clear in the current docs.
>
> ~~~
>
> nitpick - the synopsis is misplaced. It should not be between ENABLE
> and DISABLE. I moved it. Also, it should say "REFRESH PUBLICATION
> SEQUENCES" because that is how the new syntax is defined in gram.y
>
> nitpick - REFRESH SEQUENCES. Renamed to "REFRESH PUBLICATION
> SEQUENCES". And, shouldn't "from the publisher" say "with the
> publisher"?
>
> nitpick - changed the varlistentry "id".
>
> ======
> 99.
> Please also see the attached diffs patch which implements any nitpicks
> mentioned above.

All these comments are handled in the v20240720 version patch attached at [1].
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm2vuO7Ya4QVTZKR9jY_mkFFcE_hKUJiXx4KUknPgGFjSg%40mail.gmail.com

Regards,
Vignesh