| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nikhil Sontakke <nikhils(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeremy Finzel <finzelj(at)gmail(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Feature Request - DDL deployment with logical replication |
| Date: | 2018-03-31 16:57:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20180331165716.mxe5b6qshqvku7fr@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-03-31 22:13:42 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> We'll still need a mechanism to transport them to downstreams (like WAL
> messages) and to send responses upstream. For responses I think we will
> finally want to add a backchannel to the logical replication protocol as
> I've wanted for a long while: downstream can send a COPY message on COPY
> BOTH proto back to upstream, which passes it to a callback on the output
> plugin for the output plugin to act on.
Not necessarily? You can just send out the prepare, wait for all
clients to ack it, and then commit/rollback prepared.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-03-31 17:01:39 | Re: Foreign keys and partitioned tables |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-31 16:38:12 | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |