Re: running logical replication as the subscription owner

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Subject: Re: running logical replication as the subscription owner
Date: 2023-04-03 19:14:33
Message-ID: 113ce5e1e0f1b630c8d36ea1eabbf66111d4376b.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2023-04-03 at 10:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Not very much. I think the biggest risk is user confusion, but I
> don't
> think that's a huge risk because I don't think this scenario will
> come
> up very often. Also, it's kind of hard to imagine that there's a
> security model here which never does anything potentially surprising.

Alright, let's just proceed as-is then. I believe these patches are a
major improvement to the usability of logical replication and will put
up with the weirdness. I wanted to understand better why it's there,
and I'm not sure I fully do, but we'll have more time to discuss later.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2023-04-03 19:17:30 Re: zstd compression for pg_dump
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-04-03 19:08:37 Re: Should vacuum process config file reload more often