Re: Logical Replication of sequences

From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Logical Replication of sequences
Date: 2025-09-04 21:34:19
Message-ID: CAD21AoDmayf8r-E6qi_TiS28x-VWip_NArgWMOB0K3SVdtxoLw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 9:51 AM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Sept 2025 at 13:04, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Vignesh,
> >
> > Thanks for updating the patch. Few comments:
> > 01.
> > ```
> > /* Find the leader apply worker and signal it. */
> > logicalrep_worker_wakeup(MyLogicalRepWorker->subid, InvalidOid);
> > ```
> >
> > Sequencesync worker does not need to send a signal to the apply worker.
> > Should we skip in the case?
> > Per my understanding, the signal is being used to set the status to STATE_READY.
>
> Modified
>
> > 02.
> > ```
> > if (worker)
> > worker->last_seqsync_start_time = 0;
> >
> > LWLockRelease(LogicalRepWorkerLock);
> > ```
> >
> > I feel we can release LWLock first then update last_seqsync_start_time.
>
> I felt it should be done within lock so that
> ProcessSyncingSequencesForApply waits till the last_seqsync_start_time
> is also set.
>
> > 03.
> > Sequencesync worker cannot update its GUC parameters because ProcessConfigFile()
> > is not called. How about checking the signal at the end of batch loop?
>
> Modified
>
> > 04.
> > ```
> > while (search_pos < total_seqs)
> > {
> > LogicalRepSequenceInfo *candidate_seq = lfirst(list_nth_cell(sequences_to_copy, search_pos));
> >
> > if (!strcmp(candidate_seq->nspname, nspname) &&
> > !strcmp(candidate_seq->seqname, seqname))
> > {
> > seqinfo = candidate_seq;
> > search_pos++;
> > break;
> > }
> >
> > search_pos++;
> > }
> > ```
> >
> > It looks like that if the entry in sequences_to_copy is skipped, it won't be
> > referred anymore. I feel this is method is bit dangerous, because ordering of
> > the list may be different with the returned tuples from the publisher. Nodes may
> > use the different collations.
>
> Modified
>
> The attached patch has the changes for the same.

Please rebase the patches as they conflict with current HEAD (due to
commit 6359989654).

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-09-04 21:52:49 Re: [PATCH] Fix ALTER SYSTEM empty string bug for GUC_LIST_QUOTE parameters
Previous Message Dmitry Mityugov 2025-09-04 21:32:05 --with-llvm on 32-bit platforms?