From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes |
Date: | 2022-05-12 08:55:36 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KdAho_fNkYRe=o=XpxWs_TG4O0V8CJBAvTG8HamWt6OQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 2:02 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 04:17:59PM -0400, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> > On 5/10/22 11:44 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > I have completed the first draft of the PG 15 release notes and you can
> > > see the results here:
> > >
> > > https://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-15.html
> >
> > Thanks for pulling this together.
> >
> > + Allow logical replication to transfer sequence changes
> >
> > I believe this was reverted in 2c7ea57e5, unless some other parts of this
> > work made it in.
>
> Yes, sorry, I missed that. Oddly, the unlogged sequence patch was
> retained, even though there is no value for it on the primary. I
> removed the sentence that mentioned that benefit from the release notes
> since it doesn't apply to PG 15 anymore.
>
+ Create unlogged sequences and allow them to be skipped in logical replication
Is it right to say the second part of the sentence: "allow them to be
skipped in logical replication" when we are not replicating them in
the first place?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amul Sul | 2022-05-12 10:57:20 | Re: Make relfile tombstone files conditional on WAL level |
Previous Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2022-05-12 08:46:27 | Re: postgres_fdw: commit remote (sub)transactions in parallel during pre-commit |