| From: | Shinya Kato <shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Logical replication row filter loses unchanged toasted columns |
| Date: | 2026-08-18 05:10:18 |
| Message-ID: | CAOzEurTjhUxx04NHvDbW+OwzMa+BfWUPO+CBUjJ_uzTOXSa33w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 2:52 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Is there a reason for your preference for an apply-time patch for back
> branches
Neither of the two you list. What I had in mind is that the
UPDATE-time check, by design, also rejects updates whose old and new
rows both match the filter, and those replicate correctly today.
Making them fail in a minor release seemed hard to justify, so I did
not think that check was a good candidate for back-patching.
But leaving the back branches as they are is worse, because the value
disappears with nothing on either side to indicate it. Some fix has to
go in, and that is why I suggested the apply-time check there, since
it fires only when a value is actually about to be dropped.
--
Shinya Kato
NTT OSS Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Siddharth Kothari | 2026-08-18 05:12:28 | Re: [PATCH] Add RetrieveInstrumentation hook for CustomScan providers |
| Previous Message | Shinya Kato | 2026-08-18 05:07:02 | pgbench: \gset and \aset should store SQL NULL as the null value |