Hi,
On 2017-09-18 11:50:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> The reason seems to be that its method of waiting for replication
> to happen is completely inapropos. It's watching for the master
> to say that the slave has received all the WAL, but that does not
> ensure that the logicalrep apply workers have caught up, does it?
To my knowledge here's not really any difference between the two in
logical replication. Received changes are immediately applied, there's
no equivalent to a walreceiver queing up "logical wal" onto disk.
So I'm not sure that theory holds.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
