Re: row filtering for logical replication

From: Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
To: Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>
Cc: Alexey Zagarin <zagarin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Suzuki Hironobu <hironobu(at)interdb(dot)jp>, a(dot)kondratov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru
Subject: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Date: 2019-09-03 05:50:29
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-09-03 05:32, Euler Taveira wrote:
> Em ter, 3 de set de 2019 às 00:16, Alexey Zagarin <zagarin(at)gmail(dot)com>
> escreveu:
>> There are complaints in the log (both pub and sub) like:
>> ERROR: trying to store a heap tuple into wrong type of slot
>> I have no idea what causes that.
>> Yeah, I've seen that too. It was fixed by Alexey Kondratov, in line
>> 955 of 0005-Row-filtering-for-logical-replication.patch it should be
>> &TTSOpsHeapTuple instead of &TTSOpsVirtual.
> Ops... exact. That was an oversight while poking with different types
> of slots.

OK, I'll consider Alexey Kondratov's set of patches as the current
state-of-the-art then. (They still apply.)

I found a problem where I'm not sure it's a bug:

The attached bash script does a test by setting up pgbench tables on
both master and replica, and then sets up logical replication for a
slice of pgbench_accounts. Then it does a short pgbench run, and loops
until the results become identical(ok) (or breaks out after a certain
time (NOK=not ok)).

It turns out this did not work until I added a wait state after the
CREATE SUBSCRIPTION. It always fails without the wait state, and always
works with the wait state.

Do you agree this is a bug?

thanks (also to both Alexeys :))

Erik Rijkers

by the way, this script won't run as-is on other machines; it has stuff
particular to my local setup.

Attachment Content-Type Size text/x-shellscript 7.5 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-09-03 05:52:28 Re: [HACKERS] CLUSTER command progress monitor
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2019-09-03 05:43:57 Re: SIGQUIT on archiver child processes maybe not such a hot idea?