Re: Stopping logical replication protocol

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Vladimir Gordiychuk <folyga(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Stopping logical replication protocol
Date: 2016-11-03 13:44:29
Message-ID: CAMsr+YGy_JM+xJwHVg_KxH82Yk-qVqxy_UgPZn=c4BY7bfE0Mg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 21 October 2016 at 19:38, Vladimir Gordiychuk <folyga(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Craig, Andres what do you thinks about previous message?

I haven't had a chance to look further to be honest.

Since a downstream disconnect works, though it's ugly, it's not
something I can justify spending a lot of time on, and I already did
spend a lot on it in patch review/updating/testing etc.

I don't know what Andres wants, but I think CopyFail with
ERRCODE_QUERY_CANCELED is fine.

As for plugins that collect changes in memory and only send them on
commit, I'd call them "broken". Not an interesting case IMO. Don't do
that.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-11-03 13:46:28 Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level.
Previous Message Petr Jelinek 2016-11-03 13:31:20 Re: Logical Replication WIP