From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Logical replication from PG v13 and below to PG v14 (devel version) is not working. |
Date: | 2020-09-22 11:44:54 |
Message-ID: | CAFiTN-sBCO7EgK6aFJgJgDCjQuF9RmuZH8MLx9NZsOZZejpg9Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:02 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:34 AM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Dilip for the patch. AFAIU, the fix looks good. One small comment:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks Ashutosh and Dilip for working on this. I'll look into it in a
> > > day or two.
> > >
> >
> > Just a thought:
> >
> > Should we change the sequence of these #define in
> > src/include/replication/logicalproto.h?
> >
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_MIN_VERSION_NUM 1
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_VERSION_NUM 2
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_VERSION_NUM 1
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_MAX_VERSION_NUM LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_VERSION_NUM
> >
> > I would have changed above to something like this:
> >
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_VERSION_NUM 1
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_VERSION_NUM 2
> >
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_MIN_VERSION_NUM LOGICALREP_PROTO_VERSION_NUM
> > #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_MAX_VERSION_NUM LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_VERSION_NUM
> >
>
> I am not sure if this suggestion makes it better than what is purposed
> by Dilip but I think we can declare them in define number order like
> below:
> #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_MIN_VERSION_NUM 1
> #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_VERSION_NUM 1
> #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_VERSION_NUM 2
> #define LOGICALREP_PROTO_MAX_VERSION_NUM LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_VERSION_NUM
Done this way.
> Another thing is can we also test by having a publisher of v14 and
> subscriber of v13 or prior version, just reverse of what Ashutosh has
> tested?
I have also tested this and working fine.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-Bugfix-in-logical-protocol-version.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ajin Cherian | 2020-09-22 11:47:36 | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |
Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2020-09-22 10:38:46 | Re: Parallel copy |