Re: Any objections to implementing LogicalDecodeMessageCB for pgoutput?

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>
Cc: David Pirotte <dpirotte(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Any objections to implementing LogicalDecodeMessageCB for pgoutput?
Date: 2021-04-07 05:20:50
Message-ID: CAA4eK1KT5a6Z+mjphT5ZaMn78eD6RcHRWWcsAkNPiWgUooeqfw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 5:45 PM Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021, at 4:06 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> I have made few minor changes in the attached. (a) Initialize the
> streaming message callback API, (b) update docs to reflect that XID
> can be sent for streaming of in-progress transactions, I see that the
> same information needs to be updated for a few other protocol message
> but we can do that as a separate patch (c) slightly tweaked the commit
> messages
>
> Good catch. I completely forgot the streaming of in progress transactions. I
> agree that the documentation for transaction should be added as a separate
> patch since the scope is beyond this feature.
>

I have pushed this work and updated the CF entry accordingly.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com 2021-04-07 05:22:22 RE: Stronger safeguard for archive recovery not to miss data
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2021-04-07 05:03:50 Re: multi-install PostgresNode fails with older postgres versions