| From: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Doruk Yilmaz' <doruk(at)mixrank(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: [Patch] add new parameter to pg_replication_origin_session_setup |
| Date: | 2025-08-22 05:50:06 |
| Message-ID: | OSCPR01MB14966201F1DCB853145912FF1F53DA@OSCPR01MB14966.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Doruk,
> That sounds reasonable. I’ve updated the patch and added more
> information to the documentation covering the topics you mentioned.
> I also added a Caution block so potential users won’t miss it. I hope
> this patch meets your expectations.
Can you explain more why we must extend the SQL interface? I read your use
case [1], and looks like that a new type of background worker is introduced in
your system. If so, why doesn't the worker directly call C-lang interface
replorigin_session_setup()?
Personally considered, SQL functions are usable by unfamiliar users so that this
change may be dangerous. It is better if developers can use C APIs instead.
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2025-08-22 06:13:27 | Re: Report reorder buffer size |
| Previous Message | shveta malik | 2025-08-22 05:44:45 | Re: Improve pg_sync_replication_slots() to wait for primary to advance |