On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 10:58 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:19 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The problematic case is attaching the partition *after* the subscriber
> > has already marked the root parent as synced and/or ready for
> > replication. Refreshing the subscription doesn't help it discover the
> > newly attached partition, because a publish_via_partition_root only
> > ever tells about the root parent, which would be already synced, so
> > the subscriber would think there's nothing to copy.
> >
>
> Okay, I see this could be a problem but I haven't tried to reproduce it.
>
> > > Anyway, if this is a problem
> > > we need to figure the solution for this separately.
> >
> > Sure, we might need to do that after all. Though it might be a good
> > idea to be sure that we won't need to reconsider the fix we push for
> > the issue(s) being discussed here and elsewhere, because I suspect
> > that the solution to the problem I mentioned is likely to involve
> > tweaking pg_publication_tables view output.
> >
I have thought about this problem and I see two possibilities for a
solution (a) We could provide a new option say 'truncate' (something
on lines proposed here [1]) which would truncate the table(s) and
change its status to 'i' in the pg_subscription_rel, this would allow
the newly added partition to be synced after refresh. This could lead
to a large copy in such a case. (b) We could somehow get and store all
the partition info from the publisher-side on the subscriber-side
while initial sync (say in new system table
pg_subscription_rel_members). Now, after the refresh, if this list
changes, we can allow to just get the data of that particular
partition but I guess it would mean that we need to store oids of the
publisher which might or might not be safe considering oids can
wraparound before the refresh.
Do you have any other ideas?
One more thing you mentioned is that the initial sync won't work after
refresh but later changes will be replicated but I noticed that later
changes also don't get streamed till we restart the subscriber server.
I am not sure but we might not be invalidating apply workers cache due
to which it didn't notice the same.
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CF3B6672-2A43-4204-A60A-68F359218A9B%40endpoint.com
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
