| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci(at)gmail(dot)com>, japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
| Date: | 2021-12-07 02:36:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1K-+GhHqG+8yJb-neWxR_B+yeXTj7cCg9OqxTmPK3seRA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 6:18 PM Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2021, at 3:44 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> True, but that is the main reason the review and development are being
> done as separate sub-features. I suggest still keeping the similar
> separation till some of the reviews of each of the patches are done,
> otherwise, we need to rethink how to divide for easier review. We need
> to retain the 0005 patch because that handles many problems without
> which the main patch is incomplete and buggy w.r.t replica identity.
>
> IMO we should merge sub-features as soon as we reach consensus. Every new
> sub-feature breaks comments, tests and documentation if you want to remove or
> rearrange patches.
>
I agree that there is some effort but OTOH, it gives the flexibility
to do a focussed review and as soon as some patch is ready or close to
ready we can merge in the main patch. This was just a humble
suggestion based on how this patch was making progress and how it has
helped to keep some parts separate by allowing different people to
work on different parts of the problem.
> It seems I misread 0005. I agree that it is important. I'll
> check it.
>
Okay, thanks!
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-12-07 02:42:14 | Re: Why doesn't pgstat_report_analyze() focus on not-all-visible-page dead tuple counts, specifically? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-12-07 02:11:01 | Re: Why doesn't pgstat_report_analyze() focus on not-all-visible-page dead tuple counts, specifically? |