On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 4:25 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The *initial* DDL replication is a different problem than DDL replication. > > The > > former requires a snapshot to read the current catalog data and build a > > CREATE > > command as part of the subscription process. The subsequent DDLs in that > > object > > will be handled by a different approach that is being discussed here. > > > > I think they are not completely independent because of the current way > to do initial sync followed by replication. The initial sync and > replication need some mechanism to ensure that one of those doesn't > overwrite the work done by the other. Now, the initial idea and patch > can be developed separately but I think both the patches have some > dependency.
I agree with the point that their design can not be completely independent. They have some logical relationship of what schema will be copied by the initial sync and where is the exact boundary from which we will start sending as replication. And suppose first we only plan to implement the replication part then how the user will know what all schema user has to create and what will be replicated using DDL replication? Suppose the user takes a dump and copies all the schema and then creates the subscription, then how we are we going to handle the DDL concurrent to the subscription command? -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
