Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: adding partitioned tables to publications
Date: 2020-04-08 12:21:19
Message-ID: 21de0e53-0f5f-f31a-2dcb-6e4b35571c94@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-04-08 13:16, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 6:26 PM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> All committed.
>>
>> Thank you and everyone very much for working on this. I'm very happy
>> that these two features from PG10 have finally met. :)
>
> Thanks a lot for reviewing and committing.
>
> prion seems to have failed:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=prion&dt=2020-04-08%2009%3A53%3A13

This comes from -DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE.

> Also, still unsure why the coverage report for pgoutput.c changes not good:
> https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/replication/pgoutput/pgoutput.c.gcov.html

I think this is because the END { } section in PostgresNode.pm shuts
down all running instances in immediate mode, which doesn't save
coverage properly.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tushar 2020-04-08 12:22:12 Vacuum o/p with (full 1, parallel 0) option throwing an error
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2020-04-08 12:12:13 Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)