Re: User defined data types in Logical Replication

From: Đặng Minh Hướng <kakalot49(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh(at)ys(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Hiroshi Yanagisawa <hir-yanagisawa(at)ut(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: User defined data types in Logical Replication
Date: 2018-04-11 12:26:54
Message-ID: CANHVJ5dMN66fo-hjs-QF4SxcHjBVkiBtMVYiDHHzAPH-4+7hkg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2018-04-11 10:16 GMT+09:00 Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Attached an updated test patch added the above test(0002 patch). Since
> > for this test case it's enough to use existing test functions I didn't
> > create new test functions. Also I found that the local data type name
> > in log for data type conversion isn't qualified whereas the remote
> > data type is always qualified. Attached 0001 patch fixes that.
> >
>
> The original issue has been fixed and this entry on CommitFest has
> been marked as "Committed" but there are still works for improving
> testing. Perhaps I should register a new entry of remaining patches to
> next CommitFest.

Thanks. I appreciate it.

---
Dang Minh Huong

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-04-11 12:35:54 Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning
Previous Message Greg Stark 2018-04-11 12:23:49 Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS