| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Logical Replication WIP |
| Date: | 2017-01-11 21:29:15 |
| Message-ID: | e223fec8-210b-053f-227e-257ac753e9bc@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/11/17 3:35 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 11/01/17 18:27, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 1/11/17 3:11 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>>> That will not help, issue is that we consider names for origins to be
>>> unique across cluster while subscription names are per database so if
>>> there is origin per subscription (which there has to be) it will always
>>> clash if we just use the name. I already have locally changed this to
>>> pg_<subscription_oid> naming scheme and it works fine.
>>
>> How will that make it unique across the cluster?
>>
>> Should we include the system ID from pg_control?
>>
>
> pg_subscription is shared catalog so oids are unique.
Oh, I see what you mean by cluster now. It's a confusing term.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-01-11 21:30:19 | Re: Logical Replication WIP |
| Previous Message | Andrew Gierth | 2017-01-11 21:06:33 | Re: Couple of issues with prepared FETCH commands |