| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Support automatic sequence replication |
| Date: | 2026-02-18 07:41:48 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LFYdqzQvBF8ygwQn+tJBpNP3ODnx-ArpgOeGuV7F+5OA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 12:36 PM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I tested a few scenarios on the latest patch. Sequence sync worker did
> not stop in below scenarios:
>
> 1) When the subscription was disabled.
> 2) When the only publication for sequences was dropped from
> subscription ( ALTER SUBSCRIPTION sub1 DROP PUBLICATION pub_seq;)
> 3) When all sequences were dropped on sub.
>
> Application worker stops in scenario 1, seq-sync worker should also
> stop. See maybe_reread_subscription().
>
> We need to decide the behavior of the seq-sync worker for 2 and 3.
>
Shouldn't we try to map (2) and (3) to what we do for table publication?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kirill Reshke | 2026-02-18 07:58:08 | Modernize error message for malformed B-Tree tuple posting |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2026-02-18 07:39:08 | Re: Skipping schema changes in publication |