On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 05:09:40PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > > I would not in any way refer to logical decoding as being only a proof
>> > > of concept, even before logical replication.
>> >
>> > The community ships a reliable logical _encoding_, and a test logical
>> > _decoding_.
>>
>> Yes, so what? What you said is "I didn't think logical decoding was
>> really more than a proof-of-concept until now", which is plainly wrong,
>> given I know a significant number of users using it in production. Some
>> of them are well known & large enterprises, and it's used to enable
>> critical things.
>
> I am getting tired of saying this. When I am writing the release notes,
> I am trying to figure out how it affects our shipped code, and the only
> "decoding" I know of is test_decoding.
If you run 'git show --stat b89e151054a05f0f6d356ca52e3b725dd0505e53',
you will see that it includes a test_decoding module (which is a
sample logical decoding output plugin) and a tremendous pile of
changes to src/backend/replication/logical (which is the core logical
decoding infrastructure). The latter is a larger volume of changes
than the former. It would perhaps be fair to describe test_decoding
as a proof-of-concept, but it is not fair or correct to describe the
core infrastructure that way. Anyway, they're separate things.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
