RE: Logical replication is missing block of rows when sending initial sync?

From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: "'depesz(at)depesz(dot)com'" <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Logical replication is missing block of rows when sending initial sync?
Date: 2023-11-15 01:41:06
Message-ID: TYAPR01MB5866C96DDABDB0D7F2850972F5B1A@TYAPR01MB5866.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Dear Tomas, Depesz,

>
> > I'll try reproducing this locally over the weekend. Should I use the
> > test_1030.sh script that you shared a week ago, or do I need to do
> > something more?
>
> That question is probably not to me, but to Hayato Kuroda

Just FYI - As I posted, this script could not reproduce the issue. We may use the same table definition
but I have not tried yet. I will let you know if I succeeded to reproduce.

Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Kulakov 2023-11-15 07:22:53 RE: BUG #18195: PL/pgSQL: invalid syntax allowed in SELECT INTO statement
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-11-14 17:48:54 Re: BUG #18097: Immutable expression not allowed in generated at