Re: Logical replication timeout problem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Logical replication timeout problem
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1JvBO8Kr5iaQruaUGNDD8KjCjfdS=6V5xX0afQbpEZTxg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Logical replication timeout problem  ("wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com" <wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com>)
Responses RE: Logical replication timeout problem  ("houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 8:15 AM wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com
<wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> Attach the new patch.
>

I think the patch missed to handle the case of non-transactional
messages which was previously getting handled. I have tried to address
that in the attached. Is there a reason that shouldn't be handled?
Apart from that changed a few comments. If my understanding is
correct, then we need to change the callback update_progress_txn name
as well because now it needs to handle both transactional and
non-transactional changes. How about update_progress_write? We
accordingly need to change the comments for the callback.

Additionally, I think we should have a test case to show we don't time
out because of not processing non-transactional messages. See
pgoutput_message for cases where it doesn't process the message.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: to_hex() for negative inputs
Next
From: Nitin Jadhav
Date:
Subject: Re: Improve GetConfigOptionValues function