On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 10:10 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So, you're saying that when we synchronize the sequence values on the
> > subscriber side, we will create a new relfilenode to allow reverting
> > to the old state of the sequence in case of an error or transaction
> > rollback? But why would we want to do that? Generally, even if you
> > call nextval() on a sequence and then roll back the transaction, the
> > sequence value doesn't revert to the old value. So, what specific
> > problem on the subscriber side are we trying to avoid by operating on
> > a new relfilenode?
>
> Let's consider a situation where we have two sequences: seq1 with a
> value of 100 and seq2 with a value of 200. Now, let's say seq1 is
> synced and updated to 100, then we attempt to synchronize seq2,
> there's a failure due to the sequence not existing or encountering
> some other issue. In this scenario, we don't want to halt operations
> where seq1 is synchronized, but the sequence state for sequence isn't
> changed to "ready" in pg_subscription_rel.
Thanks for the explanation, but I am still not getting it completely,
do you mean to say unless all the sequences are not synced any of the
sequences would not be marked "ready" in pg_subscription_rel? Is that
necessary? I mean why we can not sync the sequences one by one and
mark them ready? Why it is necessary to either have all the sequences
synced or none of them?
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
