| From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Include sequences in publications created by pg_createsubscriber |
| Date: | 2026-07-14 14:51:45 |
| Message-ID: | CALDaNm006DYnF1o2Gyvb4sZPFfT=+ynSEPNWVm8Jts=e99qJ4Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 13 Jul 2026 at 11:07, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the comments, the attached v9 version patch has the changes
> > for the same.
> >
> Hi Vignesh,
>
> I tested and verified the patch.
> It looks good to me.
>
> I have a minor comment:
>
> Currently the following line is added at the end paragraph.
> + To synchronize sequence values, run
> + <link linkend="sql-altersubscription-params-refresh-sequences">
> + <command>ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... REFRESH SEQUENCES</command></link> on each
> + subscription at the target server.
>
> I think this line looks good along with the para which mentions about
> the 'all sequence publication':
> + which ensures each table is brought up to a synchronized state. Internally
> + generated publications include all sequences in the database, but their
> + values are not automatically synchronized. For user-specified publications,
> + sequences are only replicated if they were explicitly added to those
> + publications prior to running the tool, and as with the default mode,
> + sequence values must be manually synchronized when needed.
>
> It explains why we need to manually synchronize the sequences then we
> provide the command which we can use to synchronize. Thoughts?
>
> This is just a suggestion. I'm fine with either version.
Thanks for the suggestion. I considered placing it there, but I think
it stands out better as a separate note at the end of the description.
It serves as a "point to note" after explaining the overall workflow,
making it easier for readers to notice the required step rather than
having it buried within the discussion of publication behavior. I felt
it was more visible and generally applicable at the end. I'm happy to
adjust it if others feel the earlier placement improves the flow.
Regards,
Vignesh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2026-07-14 15:02:56 | Re: LockHasWaiters() crashes on fast-path locks |
| Previous Message | Bohyun Lee | 2026-07-14 14:42:13 | Re: [PATCH] pg_upgrade: add --initdb option to create the new cluster automatically |