| From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication |
| Date: | 2023-11-28 16:21:55 |
| Message-ID: | CALDaNm0Y0rJK4g5Zkvo6VOvZ9Nhc-jLiaK-pYnaQG=p2bDoHeQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 17:50, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 2.
> + * b) SUBREL_STATE_SYNCDONE: A relation upgraded while in this state
> + * would retain the replication origin in certain cases.
>
> I think this is vague. Can we briefly describe cases where the origins
> would be retained?
Modified
> 3. I think the cases where the publisher is also upgraded restoring
> the origin's LSN is of no use. Currently, I can't see a problem with
> restoring stale originLSN in such cases as we won't be able to
> distinguish during the upgrade but I think we should document it in
> the comments somewhere in the patch.
Added comments
These are handled in the v20 version patch attached at:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm0ST1iSrJLD_CV6hQs%3Dw4GZRCRdftQvQA3cO8Hq3QUvYw%40mail.gmail.com
Regards,
Vignesh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2023-11-28 16:23:28 | Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2023-11-28 16:19:28 | Re: [HACKERS] Changing references of password encryption to hashing |