| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Logical Replication WIP |
| Date: | 2016-11-13 05:40:12 |
| Message-ID: | 5b14e91e-155a-685c-6e5e-75cc6507309d@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/12/16 2:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> I also wonder if we want an easier to
>>> > > extend form of pubinsert/update/delete (say to add pubddl, pubtruncate,
>>> > > pub ... without changing the schema).
>>> > >
>> >
>> > So like, text array that's then parsed everywhere (I am not doing
>> > bitmask/int definitely)?
> Yes, that sounds good to me. Then convert it to individual booleans or a
> bitmask when loading the publications into the in-memory form (which you
> already do).
I'm not sure why that would be better. Adding catalog columns in future
versions is not a problem. We're not planning on adding hundreds of
publication attributes. Denormalizing catalog columns creates all kinds
of inconveniences, in the backend code, in frontend code, for users.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-11-13 07:06:36 | Re: WAL consistency check facility |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-11-13 05:20:22 | Re: Do we need use more meaningful variables to replace 0 in catalog head files? |