From: | "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | 'Melih Mutlu' <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: Allow logical replication to copy tables in binary format |
Date: | 2022-09-22 03:22:04 |
Message-ID: | TYCPR01MB8373367B78B034CECA9E070EED4E9@TYCPR01MB8373.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
Few more minor comments.
On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 2:04 AM Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> My main concern is to break a scenario that was previously working (14
> -> 15) but after a subscriber upgrade
> it won't (14 -> 16).
>
> Fair concern. Some cases that might break the logical replication with version
> upgrade would be:
...
> 3- Copying in binary format would work with the same schemas. Currently,
> logical replication does not require the exact same schemas in publisher and
> subscriber.
> This is an additional restriction that comes with the COPY command.
>
> If a logical replication has been set up with different schemas and subscription
> is created with the binary option, then yes this would break things.
> This restriction can be clearly stated and wouldn't be unexpected though.
>
> I'm also okay with allowing binary copy only for v16 or later, if you think it would
> be safer and no one disagrees with that.
> What are your thoughts?
I agree with the direction to support binary copy for v16 and later.
IIUC, the binary format replication with different data types fails even during apply phase on HEAD.
I thought that means, the upgrade concern only applies to a scenario that the user executes
only initial table synchronizations between the publisher and subscriber
and doesn't replicate any data at apply phase after that. I would say
this isn't a valid scenario and your proposal makes sense.
Best Regards,
Takamichi Osumi
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2022-09-22 03:29:13 | RE: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |
Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2022-09-22 02:10:56 | Re: binary version of pg_current_wal_insert_lsn and pg_walfile_name functions |