Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication
Date: 2022-03-15 04:46:19
Message-ID: CAA4eK1Jz-giFnk7ieeLf0Oz5Acjb=Wsufqcs6a1LXHNPZJ8aew@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 7:02 PM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 3/14/22 13:47, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:42 PM Tomas Vondra
> > <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/14/22 12:12, houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com wrote:
> >>> On Monday, March 14, 2022 5:08 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Anyway, the fix does not address tablesync, as explained in [1]. I'm not
> >> sure what to do about it - in principle, we could calculate which
> >> relations to sync, and then eliminate "duplicates" (i.e. relations where
> >> we are going to sync an ancestor).
> >>
> >
> > As mentioned in my previous email [1], this appears to be a base code
> > issue (even without row filter or column filter work), so it seems
> > better to deal with it separately. It has been reported separately as
> > well [2] where we found some similar issues.
> >
>
> Right. I don't want to be waiting for that fix either, that'd block this
> patch unnecessarily. If there are no other comments, I'll go ahead,
> polish the existing patches a bit more and get them committed. We can
> worry about this pre-existing issue later.
>

I think the first two patches are ready to go. I haven't read the
latest version in detail but I have in mind that we want to get this
in for PG-15.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yura Sokolov 2022-03-15 05:07:39 Re: BufferAlloc: don't take two simultaneous locks
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2022-03-15 04:43:53 Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication