Re: Function to move the position of a replication slot

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Function to move the position of a replication slot
Date: 2017-09-02 04:57:42
Message-ID: CAB7nPqS21=2B6vWiCeuoZ8ruy6B0DrB2ha_hR05mp+v9R-qOpw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On 8/31/17 08:19, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> I think that, in the end, covered all the comments?
>
>> I didn't see any explanation of what this would actually be useful for.
>> I suppose you could skip over some changes you don't want replicated,
>> but how do you find to what position to skip?
>
> Um ... I can see how you might expect to skip some events in a logical
> replication stream and have a chance of things not being utterly broken.
> But how can that work for physical replication? Missed updates are
> normally spelled "unrecoverable data corruption" at that level.

One use-case possible, even if it is easy to counter it by dropping
and recreating a slot, is to give up with what has been retained and
allow another client to reuse the same slot for a new standby.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-09-02 05:08:20 Re: Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2017-09-02 04:52:36 Re: configure issue - warnings sort: No such file or directory