Re: Proposal: Generic WAL logical messages

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Generic WAL logical messages
Date: 2016-04-06 14:29:12
Message-ID: 20160406142912.ny3lo3y425xzs2mq@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-04-06 10:24:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > On 2016-04-06 10:15:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Well, that's something worth thinking about. I assume that
> >> pg_logical_slot_get_changes could be executed in a database different from
> >> the one where a change was originated?
>
> > You can execute it, but you'll get an error:
>
> Oh good. I was afraid we had an unrecognized can o' worms here.

As posted nearby, there's a hole in that defense; for the messages
only. Pretty easy to solve though.

Allowing logical decoding from a difference would have a lot of
problems; primarily we couldn't actually look up any catalog state. But
even leaving that aside, it'd end up being pretty hard to interpret
database contents without knowledge about encoding.

Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2016-04-06 14:41:58 Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-04-06 14:25:13 Re: Proposal: Generic WAL logical messages