Re: row filtering for logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: row filtering for logical replication
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1+Z+Z4OUs8z1LsxYU4NAKJAy7PatV8x48HBeuN9Gk2b-A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: row filtering for logical replication  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: row filtering for logical replication  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 4:33 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 3:43 PM Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> >
> > Do we log the TOAST-ed values that were not updated?
>
> No, we don't, I have submitted a patch sometime back to fix that [1]
>

That patch seems to log WAL for key unchanged columns. What about if
unchanged non-key columns? Do they get logged as part of the new tuple
or is there some other way we can get those? If not, then we need to
probably think of restricting filter clause in some way.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: John Naylor
Date:
Subject: Re: [POC] verifying UTF-8 using SIMD instructions
Next
From: "houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side