Re: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1+ATysKLptbK+x8ygB7OAa=LHw3XTqMxKjVMsTRfdbRzQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 10:37 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I figured out that the join with pg_publication works as a filter;
> non-existence publication names are not passed to the function. If we
> pass the list of publication names to the new function signature,
> while we can simplify the patch and avoid a join, we would change the
> existing function behavior so that it ignores non-existence
> publications.
>
> I've attached the updated patch. The 0001 patch just incorporated the
> review comments so far, and the 0002 patch is a draft change for the
> above idea. Since pg_get_publication_tables(VARIADIC text) is not a
> documented function, I think we can accept small behavior changes. So
> I'm going to go with this direction.
>

What behaviour change are you referring to? In general, the direction
appears right to me.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
Date:
Subject: Re: Introduce XID age based replication slot invalidation
Next
From: Antonin Houska
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]