Re: logical replication - still unstable after all these months

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: logical replication - still unstable after all these months
Date: 2017-06-06 19:09:32
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY3KPezE5v0NixGYWiPb4Q92Vm8b2FBVVHU8Qan0=MQow@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> wrote:
> Belated apologies all round for the somewhat provocative $subject; but I
> felt at that moment that this item needed some extra attention.

FWIW, it seemed like a pretty fair subject line to me given your test
results. I think it's in everyone's interest to get this feature
stabilized before we ship a final release - people will rely on it,
and if it drops even one row even occasionally, it's going to be a big
problem for our users.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-06-06 19:14:52 Re: Should we standardize on a type for signal handler flags?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-06-06 19:07:48 Re: intermittent failures in Cygwin from select_parallel tests