| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and publication/subscription problem |
| Date: | 2021-11-29 12:20:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KVfSzrw_48e8EgSkiTUk4O9dHdoJkV-667hC3hE5uRJQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 5:04 PM Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> wrote:
>>
>> On thinking about this point again, it is not clear to me why that
>> would matter for this particular use case? Basically, when you create
>> a new subscription, it should copy the entire existing data from the
>> table directly and then will decode changes from WAL. So, I think in
>> your case all the changes between pg_upgrade and now should be
>> directly copied from tables, so probably older WAL won't be required.
>
>
> Maybe you did not understand
>
Yeah, because some information like trigger functions was not there in
your previous emails.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2021-11-29 12:28:26 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |
| Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2021-11-29 12:20:34 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |