Try
Home   >   mailing lists

RE: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
Subject RE: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Date
Msg-id OS0PR01MB5716D7FCFF42CBAD2FB31534945FA@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Wednesday, July 23, 2025 12:08 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 3:51 AM Masahiko Sawada
> <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've reviewed the 0001 patch and it looks good to me.
> >
> 
> Thanks, I have pushed the 0001 patch.

Thanks for pushing. I have rebased the remaining patches.

I have reordered the patches to prioritize the detection of update_deleted as
the initial patch. This can give us more time to consider the new GUC, since the
performance-related aspects have been documented.

One pervious patch used to prove the possibility of allowing changing the
retain_dead_tuples for enabled subscription, has not yet been rebased. I will
rebase that once all the main patches are stable.

Best Regards,
Hou zj
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: recoveryStopsAfter is not usable when recovery_target_inclusive is false
Next
From: Bertrand Drouvot
Date:
Subject: Re: Custom pgstat support performance regression for simple queries