| From: | Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add an option to skip loading missing publication to avoid logical replication failure |
| Date: | 2025-05-12 09:01:33 |
| Message-ID: | CABPTF7X8No2NLzbwL+CuNTJ5vFVfq5mDR4u95h6K_zPbXg4KRg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
If the presumed theory regarding the cause of the issue is correct — as
outlined in this email
<https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm2Pmbc-7KM3nRgZcq1EBhbdvWJSTie-st57oGuKP4O44w%40mail.gmail.com>
— and no data replication occurs in this scenario
<https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1Jz20hnPRDtPDo2BbSt0Xf8u2zY4Tc84R0OAQN8M%3D9iCQ%40mail.gmail.com>
, then the proposed fix seems ok to me.
But I don’t have the expertise to fully assess the trade-offs between
enforcing strict ordering across nodes and maintaining the current behavior.
>
> > Also, it looks like the patch mentioned in this thread addresses the
> issue:
> >
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm2Q_pfwiCkaV920iXEbh4D%3D5MmD_tNQm_GRGX6-MsLxoQ%40mail.gmail.com
> >>
>
> So you are okay with a test-only fix?
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Guo | 2025-05-12 09:29:49 | Consider explicit incremental sort for Append and MergeAppend |
| Previous Message | shveta malik | 2025-05-12 08:40:56 | Re: Fix slot synchronization with two_phase decoding enabled |