| From: | shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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: | 2026-01-20 10:38:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAJpy0uAR_3YzA8fXHGnnZN8GLDBwPpQ=VJD5478GaTPQ5gMYhg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 4:09 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 3:59 PM shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > 1)
> > I am able to insert and update rows in pg_conflict.pg_conflict_16394.
> > It should be restricted.
> >
> > 2)
> > I think we need to block 'SELECT for UPDATE' and similar operations on
> > CLT. Currently it is allowed on CLT.
> > See this:
> >
> > postgres=# SELECT * FROM pg_toast.pg_toast_3466 for UPDATE;
> > ERROR: cannot lock rows in TOAST relation "pg_toast_3466"
> > postgres=# SELECT * FROM pg_conflict.pg_conflict_16394 for UPDATE;
> > ....
>
I had a quick look at v23-001, I see that it has INSERT and UPDATE
blocked but SELECt for UPDATE is still working. I do not see any
strong need to provide this flexibility for user-level concurrency
control on conflict-tables. Shall this be blocked as well?
Also, the error I get for INSERT and UPDATE is:
postgres=# update pg_conflict.pg_conflict_16390 set relid=1;
ERROR: cannot modify or insert data for conflict log table "pg_conflict_16390"
DETAIL: Conflict log tables are system-managed and only support
cleanup via DELETE or TRUNCATE.
I feel "cannot modify or insert data into conflict log table ..."
seems more natural.
thanks
Shveta
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christoph Berg | 2026-01-20 10:46:25 | Re: Optional skipping of unchanged relations during ANALYZE? |
| Previous Message | Andrey Borodin | 2026-01-20 10:30:30 | Re: Fix gistkillitems & add regression test to microvacuum |