| From: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |
| Date: | 2025-12-04 06:51:20 |
| Message-ID: | CAJpy0uA3sHqOJWKSHK5yEn310GRCwjob=gqpZOZ4hv0eHC+csQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 4:57 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks, it looks good. For the benefit of others, could you include a
> > brief note, perhaps in the commit message for now, describing how to
> > access or read this array column? We can remove it later.
>
> Thanks, okay, temporarily I have added in a commit message how we can
> fetch the data from the JSON array field. In next version I will add
> a test to get the conflict stored in conflict log history table and
> fetch from it.
>
Thanks, I have not looked at the patch in detail yet, but a few things:
1)
Assert is hit here:
LOG: logical replication apply worker for subscription "sub1" has started
TRAP: failed Assert("slot != NULL"), File: "conflict.c", Line: 669, PID: 137604
Steps: create table tab1 (i int primary key, j int);
Pub: insert into tab1 values(10,10); insert into tab1 values(20,10);
Sub: delete from tab1 where i=10;
Pub: delete from tab1 where i=10;
2)
I see that key_tuple still points to RI and there is no RI field
added. It seems that discussion at [1] is missed in this patch.
thanks
Shveta
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jian he | 2025-12-04 06:51:54 | Re: alter check constraint enforceability |
| Previous Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2025-12-04 06:42:34 | RE: Newly created replication slot may be invalidated by checkpoint |