On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:51:38PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote: > As for implementation/replication, I haven't checked the code, but I'd > imagine the AM should be able to decide whether something needs to be > replicated (and how) or not. So the traditional sequences would > replicate, and the alternative sequences would not replicate anything.
Yep, exactly. Keeping compatibility for the in-core sequence computation is very important (including the fact that this stuff uses pseudo-heap tables for its metadata with the values computed). >> This was the key point that I wanted to discuss or hear opinions >> about. So, if we wish to have some sort of global sequences then it is >> not clear to me what benefits will we get by having replication of >> non-global sequences. One thing that comes to mind is replication >> covers a subset of use cases (like help in case of failover or >> switchover to subscriber) and till the time we have some >> implementation of global sequences, it can help users. > > What are you going to do about use cases like using logical replication > for upgrade to the next major version? Or applications that prefer (or > have to) use traditional sequences? Yeah, and that's why the logical replication of sequence has value. Giving the possibility for users or application developers to use a custom computation method may be useful for some applications, but not others. The use cases are too much different, so IMO both are useful, when applied to each user's requirements. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
