Re: Preserve subscription OIDs during pg_upgrade

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Preserve subscription OIDs during pg_upgrade
Date: 2024-02-26 04:21:40
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaS7XjD+=cvxAcBAtAG66zYndOWvSO97ADp6k6JEJ4=MQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 6:07 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> I think that the idea behind that it that it would then become
> possible to relax the restrictions related to the states of the
> relations stored in pg_subscription_rel, which can now be only a
> "ready" or "init" state (see check_old_cluster_subscription_state)
> when we begin the upgrade.

How would it help with that?

> I am not sure that it is a good idea to relax that for PG17 at this
> stage of the development cycle, though, as we have already done a lot
> in this area for pg_upgrade and it may require more tweaks during the
> beta period depending on the feedback received, so I would suggest to
> do more improvements for the 18 cycle instead once we have a cleaner
> picture of the whole.

That's fair.

I want to say that, unlike Tom, I'm basically in favor of preserving
OIDs in more places across updates. It seems to have little downside
and improve the understandability of the outcome. But that's separate
from whether it is a good idea to build on that infrastructure in any
particular way in the time we have left for this release.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2024-02-26 05:18:38 Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2024-02-26 04:18:51 Re: Relation bulk write facility