Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tomas Vondra
Subject Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences
Date
Msg-id c38fd4df-f71a-cf47-88cd-5f486b5bca92@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/10/22 12:07, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 23.02.22 00:24, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Here's an updated version of the patch, fixing most of the issues from
>> reviews so far. There's still a couple FIXME comments, but I think those
>> are minor and/or straightforward to deal with.
> 
> This patch needs a rebase because of a conflict in
> expected/publication.out.  In addition, see the attached fixup patch to
> get the pg_dump tests passing (and some other stuff).
> 

OK, rebased patch attached.

> 028_sequences.pl should be renamed to 029, since there is now another 028.
> 

Renamed.

> In psql, the output of \dRp and \dRp+ is inconsistent.  The former shows
> 
> All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes | Truncates |
> Sequences | Via root
> 
> the latter shows
> 
> All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes | Sequences |
> Truncates | Via root
> 
> I think the first order is the best one.
> 

Good idea, I've tweaked the code to use the former order.

> That's all for now, I'll come back with more reviewing later.


thanks

-- 
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum
Next
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: Changing "Hot Standby" to "hot standby"