| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Alexey Lesovsky <lesovsky(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
| Date: | 2021-10-10 14:04:31 |
| Message-ID: | 2a9287f4-a870-ee93-d032-b93d7e908ba7@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 04.10.21 02:31, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I guess disabling subscriptions on error/conflict and skipping the
> particular transactions are somewhat different types of functions.
> Disabling subscriptions on error/conflict seems likes a setting
> parameter of subscriptions. The users might want to specify this
> option at creation time. Whereas, skipping the particular transaction
> is a repair function that the user might want to use on the spot in
> case of a failure. I’m concerned a bit that combining these functions
> to one syntax could confuse the users.
Also, would the skip option be dumped and restored using pg_dump? Maybe
there is an argument for yes, but if not, then we probably need a
different path of handling it separate from the more permanent options.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-10-10 14:07:43 | Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three - remastered set |
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2021-10-10 13:33:32 | Re: Reword docs of feature "Remove temporary files after backend crash" |