| From: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Logical Replication of sequences |
| Date: | 2025-10-28 01:47:03 |
| Message-ID: | 42723960-226F-48A8-85BB-5ED476ACC4D6@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Oct 27, 2025, at 17:11, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> The changes in 0001 are straightforward, looks good. I haven’t reviewed 0004 yet.
Comments for 0004:
1 - config.sgml
```
- In logical replication, this parameter also limits how often a failing
- replication apply worker or table synchronization worker will be
- respawned.
+ In logical replication, this parameter also limits how quickly a
+ failing replication apply worker, table synchronization worker, or
+ sequence synchronization worker will be respawned.
```
* “a failing replication apply worker” sounds a bit redundant, maybe change to “a failed apply worker”
* “will be respawned” works, but in formal documentation, I think “is respawned” is better
2 - logic-replication.sgml
```
- or <literal>FOR ALL SEQUENCES</literal>.
+ or <literal>FOR ALL SEQUENCES</literal>. Unlike tables, the current state of
+ sequences may be synchronized at any time. For more information, refer to
+ <xref linkend="logical-replication-sequences"/>.
```
* “may be” better to be “can be”
* I think the first sentence can be slightly enhanced as "Unlike tables, the state of a sequence can be synchronized at any time.”
* “refer to” should be “see” in PG docs. You can see right the next paragraph just uses “see”:
```
<command>TRUNCATE</command>. See <xref linkend="logical-replication-row-filter"/>).
```
3 - logic-replication.sgml
```
+ To synchronize sequences from a publisher to a subscriber, first publish
+ them using <link linkend="sql-createpublication-params-for-all-sequences">
+ <command>CREATE PUBLICATION ... FOR ALL SEQUENCES</command></link> and then
+ at the subscriber side:
```
“At the subscriber side” is better to be “on the subscriber”. Actually, you also use “on the subscriber” in the following paragraphs.
4 - logic-replication.sgml
```
During sequence synchronization, the sequence definitions of the publisher
and the subscriber are compared. An ERROR is logged listing all differing
sequences before the process exits. The apply worker detects this failure
and repeatedly respawns the sequence synchronization worker to continue
the synchronization process until all differences are resolved. See also
```
* “An ERROR” => “An error”. If you search for the current doc, “error” are all in lower case.
* " the sequence synchronization worker to continue the synchronization process”, the second “synchronization” sounds redundant, maybe enhance to "the sequence synchronization worker to retry"
5 - logic-replication.sgml
```
During sequence synchronization, if a sequence is dropped on the
publisher, the sequence synchronization worker will identify this and
remove it from sequence synchronization on the subscriber.
```
“Will identify this” => “detects the change”, I think PG docs usually prefer more direct phrasing.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2025-10-28 02:01:10 | minor error message enhance: print RLS policy name when only one permissive policy exists |
| Previous Message | Mihail Nikalayeu | 2025-10-28 01:19:00 | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |