| From: | Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Oh, Mike" <minsoo(at)amazon(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] Logical replication failure "ERROR: could not map filenode "base/13237/442428" to relation OID" with catalog modifying txns |
| Date: | 2021-10-12 22:55:53 |
| Message-ID: | e54a6cfe-59fe-831d-55e9-3d5fa037894a@ardentperf.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/10/21 23:27, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> After more thought, given DDLs are not likely to happen than DML in
> practice, ...
I haven't looked closely at the patch, but I'd be careful about
workloads where people create and drop "temporary tables". I've seen
this pattern used a few times, especially by developers who came from a
SQL server background, for some reason.
I certainly don't think we need to optimize for this workload - which is
not a best practice on PostreSQL. I'd just want to be careful not to
make PostgreSQL logical replication crumble underneath it, if PG was
previously keeping up with difficulty. That would be a sad upgrade
experience!
-Jeremy
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josef Šimánek | 2021-10-12 23:19:27 | Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2021-10-12 22:55:14 | Re: Inconsistency in startup process's MyBackendId and procsignal array registration with ProcSignalInit() |