Re: row filtering for logical replication

From: "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>
To: "Tomas Vondra" <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Ajin Cherian" <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Peter Smith" <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Amit Kapila" <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Rahila Syed" <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci(at)gmail(dot)com>, japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "David Steele" <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, "Craig Ringer" <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Tomas Vondra" <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Amit Langote" <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Date: 2021-09-27 13:49:16
Message-ID: bded3b12-0007-48c9-a4bd-0dd6bc1cd539@www.fastmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021, at 10:34 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I see no one responded to this important part of my review so far:
I'm still preparing a new patch and a summary.

> Am I the only one finding the current behavior strange? What's the
> reasoning supporting the current approach?
I think it is an oversight from my side. It used to work the way you mentioned
but I changed it. I'll include this change in the next patch.

--
Euler Taveira
EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Antonin Houska 2021-09-27 14:15:08 Re: POC: Cleaning up orphaned files using undo logs
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2021-09-27 13:44:30 Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend