Re: Logical Replication of sequences

From: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok(dot)kyal(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Logical Replication of sequences
Date: 2025-10-08 10:19:57
Message-ID: CALDaNm1Y-OFoUzXMJXf7qp9goCp95YjGzbq0QMVEynAN62gCxg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 at 15:38, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 at 3:15 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 2:41 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 4:52 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 at 12:09, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> >
>> > I think the patch is mostly LGTM, I have 2 suggestions, see if you
>> > think this is useful.
>> >
>> > 1.
>> > postgres[1390699]=# CREATE PUBLICATION pub FOR ALL SEQUENCES, ALL
>> > TABLES WITH (publish = insert);
>> > NOTICE: 55000: publication parameters are not applicable to sequence
>> > synchronization and will be ignored
>> > LOCATION: CreatePublication, publicationcmds.c:905
>> >
>> > IMHO this notice seems confusing, from this it appears that (publish =
>> > insert) is ignored completely, but actually it is is not ignored for
>> > table, should we explicitely say that it will be ignored only for
>> > sequences. Something like below?
>> >
>> > "publication parameters are not applicable to sequence synchronization
>> > so it will be used only for tables and will be ignored for sequence
>> > synchronization"
>> > or
>> > "publication parameters are not applicable to sequence synchronization
>> > so it will be ignored for the sequence synchronization"
>> >
>>
>> How about a slightly shorter form like: 'publication parameters are
>> not applicable to sequence synchronization and will be ignored for
>> sequences'?
>
> Works for me.

Thanks for the comments, here is an updated version with a fix to handle this.

Regards,
Vignesh

Attachment Content-Type Size
v20251008-0001-Introduce-ALL-SEQUENCES-support-for-Postgr.patch application/octet-stream 125.3 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message shveta malik 2025-10-08 10:27:26 Re: Issue with logical replication slot during switchover
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2025-10-08 10:12:10 Re: Should we update the random_page_cost default value?