| From: | Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Binary support for pgoutput plugin |
| Date: | 2019-06-11 19:44:02 |
| Message-ID: | CADK3HH+nT4s8sZC3cBzbr2W64iz7B60TEtWYXc2opsnq08e7NA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
OK, before I go too much further down this rabbit hole I'd like feedback on
the current code. See attached patch
There is one obvious hack where in binary mode I reset the input cursor to
allow the binary input to be re-read
From what I can tell the alternative is to convert the data in
logicalrep_read_tuple but that would require moving a lot of the logic
currently in worker.c to proto.c. This seems minimally invasive.
and thanks Petr for the tip to use pglogical for ideas.
Thanks,
Dave Cramer
>
>
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-First-pass-at-working-code-without-subscription-opti.patch | application/octet-stream | 21.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2019-06-11 20:12:19 | Re: Should we warn against using too many partitions? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-06-11 19:03:56 | Re: Is it safe to ignore the return value of SPI_finish and SPI_execute? |