| From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup |
| Date: | 2022-03-16 05:47:16 |
| Message-ID: | CALDaNm3sEkLDsgSLi_1Z6jk+CQ3JzQNc6vPtgCLpqn0YCM2H0g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 9:55 AM kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com
<kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Dear Vignesh,
>
> > Thanks for kind explanation.
> > I read above and your doc in 0002, and I put some comments.
>
> I forgot a comment about 0002 doc.
>
> 5. create_subscription.sgml - about your example
>
> Three possibilities were listed in the doc,
> but I was not sure about b) case.
> In the situation Node1 and Node2 have already become multi-master,
> and data has already synced at that time.
> If so, how do we realize that "there is data present only in one Node"?
> Case a) and c) seem reasonable.
Your point is valid, modified.
The changes for the same are available int the v5 patch available at [1].
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALDaNm3wCf0YcvVo%2BgHMGpupk9K6WKJxCyLUvhPC2GkPKRZUWA%40mail.gmail.com
Regards,
Vignesh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2022-03-16 06:14:25 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2022-03-16 05:45:09 | Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup |