RE: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)
Subject RE: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow
Date
Msg-id TY4PR01MB169072EB113D17B71CF1F97FA9452A@TY4PR01MB16907.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Initial COPY of Logical Replication is too slow
List pgsql-hackers
On Friday, March 27, 2026 2:20 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've attached the updated patch. I believe I've addressed all comments I got
> so far. In addition to that, I've refactored
> is_table_publishable_in_publication() and added more regression tests.

Thanks for updating the patch.

The latest patch looks mostly good to me. However, I noticed one issue: the
function returns table information even for unlogged or temporary tables. I
think we should return NULL for those cases instead.

BTW, I think we could use is_publishable_class() as a reference to check once
whether all unpublishable table types are properly ignored in this function.

Best Regards,
Hou zj

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: John Naylor
Date:
Subject: clang bug affecting greenfly
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_publication_tables: return NULL attnames when no column list is specified