Re: Logical Decoding follows timelines - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Logical Decoding follows timelines
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqS28_Mfj+JzOLuEJVSZNbhyVUnT9q+ULOcQXXGEvB1NVA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Logical Decoding follows timelines  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Logical Decoding follows timelines  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
<div dir="ltr"><br /><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Simon
Riggs<span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:simon@2ndquadrant.com" target="_blank">simon@2ndquadrant.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br/><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class="">On16 December 2014 at 21:17, Simon Riggs <<a
href="mailto:simon@2ndquadrant.com">simon@2ndquadrant.com</a>>wrote:<br /><br /> >>> This patch is a WIP
versionof doing that, but only currently attempts<br /><br /></span><span class="">>> With the patch,
XLogSendLogicaluses the same logic to calculate SendRqstPtr<br /> >> that XLogSendPhysical does. It would be good
torefactor that into a common<br /> >> function, rather than copy-paste.<br /> ><br /> > Some of the logic
issimilar, but not all.<br /> ><br /> >> SendRqstPtr isn't actually used for anything in XLogSendLogical.<br
/>><br /> > It exists to allow the call which resets TLI.<br /> ><br /> > I'll see if I can make it exactly
identical;I didn't think so when I<br /> > first looked, will look again.<br /><br /></span>Yes, that works. New
versionattached<br /></blockquote></div><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">Moved patch to CF 2015-02 to not lose
trackof it, also because it does not seem it received a proper review.<br />-- <br /><div
class="gmail_signature">Michael<br/></div></div></div> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: hashjoin - gracefully increasing NTUP_PER_BUCKET instead of batching
Next
From: Marko Tiikkaja
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch to support SEMI and ANTI join removal