Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Date: 2025-07-23 04:07:55
Message-ID: CAA4eK1JKMSLfnxWE7X5DyY2v962s=Cz3kh=JPL2NiO+=VRG9qw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 3:51 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I've reviewed the 0001 patch and it looks good to me.
>

Thanks, I have pushed the 0001 patch.

The patch still
> has XXX comments at several places. Do we want to keep all of them
>

Yes, those are primarily the ideas for future optimization and or
special notes for some not so obvious design decisions.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Japin Li 2025-07-23 04:07:56 Re: IndexAmRoutine aminsertcleanup function can be NULL?
Previous Message Alexander Lakhin 2025-07-23 04:00:00 Re: stats.sql might fail due to shared buffers also used by parallel tests