RE: row filtering for logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com
Subject RE: row filtering for logical replication
Date
Msg-id OS0PR01MB5716A8D36D907164CACAFBEC94699@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: row filtering for logical replication  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: row filtering for logical replication  (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>)
Re: row filtering for logical replication  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thur, Dec 2, 2021 5:21 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> PSA the v44* set of patches.
> 
> The following review comments are addressed:
> 
> v44-0001 main patch
> - Renamed the TAP test 026->027 due to clash caused by recent commit [1]
> - Refactored table_close [Houz 23/11] #2
> - Alter compare where clauses [Amit 24/11] #0
> - PG docs CREATE SUBSCRIPTION [Tang 30/11] #2
> - PG docs CREATE PUBLICATION [Vignesh 30/11] #1, #4, [Tang 30/11] #1, [Tomas
> 23/9] #2
> 
> v44-0002 validation walker
> - Add NullTest support [Peter 18/11]
> - Update comments [Amit 24/11] #3
> - Disallow user-defined types [Amit 24/11] #4
> - Errmsg - skipped because handled by top-up [Vignesh 23/11] #2
> - Removed #if 0 [Vignesh 30/11] #2
> 
> v44-0003 new/old tuple
> - NA
> 
> v44-0004 tab-complete and pgdump
> - Handle table-list commas better [Vignesh 23/11] #2
> 
> v44-0005 top-up patch for validation
> - (This patch will be added again later)

Attach the v44-0005 top-up patch.
This version addressed all the comments received so far,
mainly including the following changes:
1) rename rfcol_valid_for_replica to rfcol_valid
2) Remove the struct PublicationInfo and add the rfcol_valid flag directly in relation
3) report the invalid column number in the error message.
4) Rename some function to match the usage.
5) Fix some typos and add some code comments.
6) Fix a miss in testcase.

Best regards,
Hou zj




Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andy Fan
Date:
Subject: Re: Can I assume relation would not be invalid during from ExecutorRun to ExecutorEnd
Next
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)