Re: Support logical replication of DDLs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Support logical replication of DDLs
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1LC=K7vqBBPGUovYJ9voqmf2-nEcpfonO10weAJQhob4A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Support logical replication of DDLs  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 9:47 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:24 PM Zheng Li <zhengli10@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Good catch. The reason for having isTopLevel in the condition is
> > because I haven't decided if a DDL statement inside a PL should
> > be replicated from the user point of view. For example, if I execute a
> > plpgsql function or a stored procedure which creates a table under the hood,
> > does it always make sense to replicate the DDL without running the same
> > function or stored procedure on the subscriber? It probably depends on
> > the specific
> > use case. Maybe we can consider making this behavior configurable by the user.
>
> But then this could be true for DML as well right?  Like after
> replicating the function to the subscriber if we are sending the DML
> done by function then what's the problem in DDL.  I mean if there is
> no design issue in implementing this then I don't think there is much
> point in blocking the same or even providing configuration for this.
>

Valid point. I think if there are some design/implementation
constraints for this then it is better to document those(probably as
comments).

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Support logical replication of DDLs
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side