| From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication |
| Date: | 2022-01-11 21:10:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20220111211053.GB14051@telsasoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Is there any coordination between the "column filter" patch and the "row
filter" patch ? Are they both on track for PG15 ? Has anybody run them
together ?
Whichever patch is merged 2nd should include tests involving a subset of
columns along with a WHERE clause.
I have a suggestion: for the functions for which both patches are adding
additional argument types, define a filtering structure for both patches to
use. Similar to what we did for some utility statements in a3dc92600.
I'm referring to:
logicalrep_write_update()
logicalrep_write_tuple()
That would avoid avoid some rebase conflicts on april 9, and avoid functions
with 7,8,9 arguments, and maybe simplify adding arguments in the future.
--
Justin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-01-11 21:13:03 | Re: Windows crash / abort handling |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-01-11 20:54:19 | Re: Use -fvisibility=hidden for shared libraries |