Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication

From: Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Date: 2025-05-23 15:51:01
Message-ID: CABPTF7U8SKpw+Hepd4MJ+oPBAWdFmYukyk92TKLkZGHhQD4KaQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Zhijie,

Thanks for the effort on the patches. I did a quick look on them before
diving into the logic and discussion. Below are a few minor typos found in
version 31.

1. Spelling of “non-removable”

[PATCH v31 1/7]

In docs and code “removeable” vs. “removable” are used alternatively and
omitted the hyphen in “non-removable”.

2. Double “arise” in SGML

[PATCH v31 7/7]

In doc/src/sgml/logical-replication.sgml under the <varlistentry
id="conflict-update-deleted">, have duplicate arise:

+ are enabled. Note that if a tuple cannot be found due to the table
being
+ truncated only a <literal>update_missing</literal> conflict will
arise.
+ arise

3. Commit-message typos

[PATCH v31 1/7] (typo “tranasction”)

Subject: [PATCH v30 1/7] Maintain the oldest non removeable tranasction ID
by
apply worker

>
> Attaching the V31 patch set which addressed comments in [1]~[8].
>
> The comments in [9] concerning the new GUC in patch 0004 is still under
> review
> and will be addressed in the next version.
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uD6SgD7w839Wzezdj0JT2OnA%2BxCxddM15%3Dgb5nRqYAv%2BA%40mail.gmail.com
> [2]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uCYqG16zCjiCK4og6yqR7zP2rB1oOT7%3DAnDdVePo-8RrA%40mail.gmail.com
> [3]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1KemsW0EXaSy2Y-M-vVy5Gh4onNG%2B%2BkKs7ugY%2B3N-g-Yw%40mail.gmail.com
> [4]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1%2Br9V6DpH9gYRa2xOx167FapbuKdc4gESr8Etxpx2zrqw%40mail.gmail.com
> [5]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uArh0A9yOxoamD0RWM-7K9kyoUMNh5C2%2BPFTbGFoxf5wg%40mail.gmail.com
> [6]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAJpy0uDL4oLdhYup44a2%3D1OeyUSsKhg8Y30-h1uxcf%3Dmki57uA%40mail.gmail.com
> [7]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1%2BVNaGi-GU6awgFKmTgidLTHo2HDuzV1%2BaT8sjn8QtPxg%40mail.gmail.com
> [8]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1%2B%3DZAf0T2iMg2%2BZF4cJdUk%3DUViqpiOg_kPa8jgK%2Bg94aw%40mail.gmail.com
> [9]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1LLaXzsKOaPwGTiikOYySYK%2BTy_x3EXg-g%3D7M_CLn4WiQ%40mail.gmail.com
>
> Best Regards,
> Hou zj
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florents Tselai 2025-05-23 16:03:31 mention unused_oids script in pg_proc.dat
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2025-05-23 15:49:04 Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck