Re: Binary support for pgoutput plugin

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Binary support for pgoutput plugin
Date: 2019-06-07 23:27:44
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2019-06-05 19:05:05 -0400, Dave Cramer wrote:
> I am curious why you are "strongly" opposed however. We already have the
> information. Adding doesn't seem onerous.

(thought I'd already replied with this)

The problem is that I don't recognize a limiting principle:

If we want NOT NULL information for clients, why don't we include the
underlying types for arrays, and the fields in composite types? What
about foreign keys? And unique keys?

And then we suddenly need tracking for all these, so we don't always
send out that information when we previously already did - and in some
of the cases there's no infrastructure for that.

I just don't quite buy that the output plugin build for pg's logical
replication needs is a good place to include a continually increasing
amount of metadata that logical replication doesn't need. That's going
to add overhead and make the code more complicated.


Andres Freund

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-06-07 23:59:37 Re: Temp table handling after anti-wraparound shutdown (Was: BUG #15840)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-06-07 23:01:03 Re: BUG #15840: Vacuum does not work after database stopped for wraparound protection. Database seems unrepearable.