| From: | Zheng Li <zhengli10(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, rajesh singarapu <rajesh(dot)rs0541(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Date: | 2022-05-03 21:30:20 |
| Message-ID: | CAAD30UL5o=yiPDB6A5RUCFy0H8Oem9E2oH7jqS1O25Yv4V3FxA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> > >Another somewhat unrelated problem I see with this work is how to save
> > >recursion of the same command between nodes (when the involved nodes
> > >replicate DDLs). For DMLs, we can avoid that via replication origins
> > >as is being done in the patch proposed [1] but not sure how will we
> > >deal with that here?
> >
> > I'll need to investigate "recursion of the same command between
> > nodes", could you provide an example?
> >
>
> See email [1]. I think the same solution should work for your proposal
> as well because I see that LogLogicalMessage includes origin but it is
> better if you can confirm it.
>
> [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CALDaNm0gwjY_4HFxvvty01BOT01q_fJLKQ3pWP9=9orqubhjcQ(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com
Yes, I applied the patches from [1] and can confirm that the solution
for "infinite recursion of the same command(DDL command in this case)
between nodes" works with my patches.
Regards,
Zheng
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bryn Llewellyn | 2022-05-03 22:03:32 | Meaning of "constant" not honored when the variable is used as the actual for a proc's OUT formal paameter |
| Previous Message | JORGE MALDONADO | 2022-05-03 17:26:56 | Re: Backing up a DB excluding certain tables |