Re: Logical Replication of sequences - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From shveta malik
Subject Re: Logical Replication of sequences
Date
Msg-id CAJpy0uD00JCsgDxL3YjdPQFSnV4mv4D9XPZV_9=aMNDLao7SQQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Logical Replication of sequences  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 8:09 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> These comments are handled in the attached v2025029 version patch.
>

Thanks for the patches. I am still reviewing but please find few comments:

1)
     <para>
      Only persistent sequences are included in the publication. Temporary
      sequences are excluded from the publication.
     </para>

We shall mention UNLOGGED sequences as well along with TEMP sequences.

2)
Why do we have GetAllSequencesPublicationRelations() in patch002? It
is used only in patch004. Same thing with is_publishable_class()
change.

3)
process_syncing_tables_for_sync() is renamed to ProcessSyncingTablesForSync()
process_syncing_tables_for_apply() is renamed to ProcessSyncingTablesForApply()
process_syncing_tables() is renamed to SyncProcessRelations()

Why have we named it SyncProcessRelations and not
ProcessSyncingRelations? Is it because we want to start a name with
'Sync' in order to have file name initials? But do not see other files
following it. IMO, ProcessSyncingTables looks more familiar and apt
over SyncProcessRelations. Same with 'SyncFinishWorker'.
FinishSyncWorker instead looks better. Thoughts?


4)
postgres=# CREATE publication pub1 for sequences;
ERROR:  invalid publication object list
LINE 1: CREATE publication pub1 for sequences;
                                    ^
DETAIL:  One of TABLE or TABLES IN SCHEMA must be specified before a
standalone table or schema name.

Do you think we shall mention sequence specific info as well in DETAIL now?

thanks
Shveta



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yura Sokolov
Date:
Subject: Re: Speedup truncations of temporary relation forks
Next
From: Dimitrios Apostolou
Date:
Subject: Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress postgresql files