[HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject [HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade
Date
Msg-id 20170217020415.GI9812@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: [HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade
Re: [HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade
Re: [HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
Peter,

* Peter Eisentraut (peter_e@gmx.net) wrote:
> Logical replication
>
> - Add PUBLICATION catalogs and DDL
> - Add SUBSCRIPTION catalog and DDL
> - Define logical replication protocol and output plugin
> - Add logical replication workers

I'm not entirely sure about the reasoning behind requiring a flag to
include subscriptions in pg_dump output, as the documentation doesn't
actually provide one, but if we are going to require that, shouldn't
pg_upgrade use it, to make sure that the subscriptions are pulled
forward to the upgraded cluster?

Also, we should probably discuss that default in pg_dump to not include
something in the database by default as that's not something we've ever
done before.  We made a very deliberate point to make sure that RLS
didn't work by default with pg_dump to avoid the risk that we might not
dump include everything in the database in the pg_dump output.  I agree
that it's not exactly the same, but even so, I was surprised to find
out that subscriptions aren't included by default and I doubt I'd be
alone.

If this was all already discussed, I'm happy to go review the relevant
thread(s).  I'll admit that I didn't follow all of that discussion very
closely, I'm just going through parts of pg_dump which are not being
tested in our regression tests currently and discovered that dumping out
subscriptions is not tested at all.

Thanks!

Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Avoiding OOM in a hash join with many duplicate inner keys
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned tables and relfilenode