I've always assumed there'd have to be at least one global stream, if for no other purpose than to be the source of truth about transaction commit ordering (though, I was thinking of supporting multiple streams for one database). Presumably the same could be used for shared objects. Or perhaps shared objects just get their own stream. Either way, having a master commit record that points at LSNs of various other streams is what I'd been thinking.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 12:01 PM Devrim Gündüz <dev...@gunduz.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 2025-04-23 at 11:48 -0500, Jim Nasby wrote: > > unless we added multiple WAL streams. That would allow for splitting > > WAL traffic across multiple devices as well as providing better > > support for configurations that don’t replicate the entire cluster. > > The current situation where delayed replication of a single table > > mandates retention of all the WAL for the entire cluster is less than > > ideal. > > I think the problem is handling the stream of global objects. Having > separate stream for each database would be awesome as long as it can > deal with the "global stream". > > Regards, > -- > Devrim Gündüz > Open Source Solution Architect, PostgreSQL Major Contributor > BlueSky: @devrim.gunduz.org , @gunduz.org >
