| From: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Dilip Kumar' <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: [PATCH] Support automatic sequence replication |
| Date: | 2026-02-23 05:44:46 |
| Message-ID: | OS9PR01MB121491AB296883DE7445C0643F577A@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Dilip,
> Thanks for clarifying the use case, and I agree this is a valid use
> case, although I am not completely sure how exactly we are achieving
> that? I mean sequence sync workers need to fetch the list of all
> published sequences to identify whether they are in sync with the
> local sequence state or not? Or somehow we can avoid that? If not
> what we would save, updating the local states of the sequences if they
> are already in sync?
IIUC, the sequencesync worker first lists all sequences on the subscriber, then
gets their states on the publisher side. Then the worker updates the state only
when the sequence between instances is different.
Does it make sense for you?
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2026-02-23 05:49:08 | Re: pgstat include expansion |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2026-02-23 05:44:19 | Re: [PATCH] Support automatic sequence replication |