On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 11:37 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> on Mon, 28 Jul 2025 22:19:36 -0700,
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > The fields in 1 are mostly static f
ve a test to verify that a logical replication slot can not be
> created on a standby whose primary does *not* have effective_wal_level
> 'logical'?
>
I think no, so will add that test.
> +
> +# Create a logical slot on the standby, which should be succeeded
>
> gramm
functional impact. But maybe we should consider
> making this a bit more clear by setting
> checkPoint.logicalDecodingEnabled based on wal_level in
> BootStrapXLOG(). Whether we change the code or not, I think we should
> add a comment to explain this code.
I agree that calling IsLogicalDecodingEnabled() in BootStrapXLOG()
could be quite confusing. I think we can directly set false there and
add some comments for those who try to change the default wal_level
value.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 11:32 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 3:46 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached the updated patch that incorporated all comments I got so far.
> >
>
> *
> + /*
> + * While all processes are
lots and whole replication will stop. I think this table
> will be created with the same privileges as the owner of a
> subscription which can be either a superuser or a user with the
> privileges of the pg_create_subscription role, so we can rely on such
> users.
We might want to
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 5:24 PM Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
>
> On 9/18/25 01:18, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > For your information, while the implementation itself is relatively
> > straightforward, we're still facing one unresolved issue; the system
> > doesn&#x
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:41 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> on Tue, 9 Sep 2025 13:15:43 -0700,
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> >> I don't object your approach bu
in binary format cases,
bufferedBytes is not increased as we don't use line_buf. So we always
buffer 1000 tuples regardless of tuple size. Is it intentional
behavior? I could not find any related discussion on the original
discussion threads.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web
On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 1:30 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 10:15 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 7:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 11:18 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > >
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 4:25 AM Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 9/8/25 17:40, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 2:30 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 8:55 AM Melanie Plageman
> >> wrote:
>
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:16 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 11:32 PM Amit Kapila
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 3:46 AM Masahiko Sawada
> >
does it complete the query with files names even after 'PROGRAM'?
---
+static char *
+_complete_from_files(const char *text, int state)
{
I think the comments of complete_from_files() should be moved to this
new function. For instance, the comments starts with:
* This function wraps rl_filename_completion_function() to strip quotes from
* the input before searching for matches and to quote any matches for which
* the consuming command will require it.
But complete_from_files() function no longer calls
rl_filename_completion_function().
---
- /* Complete COPY FROM */
- else if (Matches("COPY|\\copy", MatchAny, "FROM", MatchAny))
+ /* Complete COPY FROM [PROGRAM] */
+ else if (Matches("COPY|\\copy", MatchAny, "FROM",
MatchAnyExcept("PROGRAM")) ||
+Matches("COPY|\\copy", MatchAny, "FROM", "PROGRAM", MatchAny))
I see this kind of conversion many places in the patch; convert one
condition with MatchAny into two conditions with
MatchAnyExcept("PROGRAM") and '"PROGRAM", MatchAny'. How about
simplifying it using MatchAnyN. For example,
else if (Matches("COPY|\\copy", MatchAny, "FROM", MatchAny, MatchAnyN))
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
e retention timeout correctly. Because these are corner cases, I
> believe we should avoid over-engineering a solution and simply restart
> the worker, as Amit suggested.
+1
While it's ideal if workers could initialize their
oldest_nonremovable_xid values on-the-fly, I believe we can begin with
the simple solution given that stopping and resuming retaining of
conflict info would not happen so often. In fact, frequent stops and
restarts would typically be a sign that users might be not configuring
the options properly for their systems. IIUC if the workers are able
to do that, we can support to activate retain_conflict_info even for
enabled subscriptions. I think we can leave it for future improvements
if necessary.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 4:19 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 11:49 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 1:30 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > When user is dropping a temporary slot, we should disable the
> >
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 5:57 AM Florents Tselai
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 12:56 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 12:43 PM Florents Tselai
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 6, 2
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 11:50 AM Alexander Korotkov
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 12:04 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 1:31 AM Daniil Davydov <3daniss...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > O
the API clearly.
Thank you for updating the patch. It seems cfbot caught a regression
test error[1] in a 32-bit build.
Regards,
[1] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5290864655728640
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
, s - 1)));
+errmsg("invalid symbol \"%.*s\" found while
decoding %s sequence",
+ pg_mblen(s - 1), s - 1,
+ url ? "base64url" : "base64")));
The above change makes the error message mention the encoding name
properly. On the other hand, in pg_base64_decode_internal() there are
two places where we report invalid data and always mention 'based64'
in the error message:
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
errmsg("unexpected \"=\" while decoding base64 sequence")));
and
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
errmsg("invalid base64 end sequence"),
errhint("Input data is missing padding, is truncated, or is
otherwise corrupted.")));
Do we need to have a similar change for these messages?
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 11:22 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 11:22 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 9:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 3:58 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
> &g
that
> and thanks very much for all the explanation!
>
> I'll keep on hold the development of new patch versions for this thread
> and focus on review and test the patch from Rishu at [1] to see if we
> can make progress using the WAL approach.
While the WAL-based approac
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 5:07 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> on Thu, 11 Sep 2025 13:41:26 -0700,
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > I think we can use a local variable o
On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 7:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 11:18 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > For the shutdown sequence, can't we think of resetting
statement and a draft quote.
>
> As per above, I'll need remaining feedback no later than 2025-09-14 0:00
> UTC - after this, it's frozen for the translation process to begin.
>
I found a typo;
s/gen_rand_uuid()/gen_random_uuid()/
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
longer need to have a pair of page number and
offset number as an entry queue's position since AsyncQueueEntry is
now a fixed size.
> BTW, what do you think about creating a separate thread for the patch?
> The current thread's subject seems a bit irrelevant.
+1
Regards,
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 10:46 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 11:32 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 3:46 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I've attached the updated patch tha
calDecodingContext *ctx)
repSlotStat.stream_bytes = rb->streamBytes;
repSlotStat.total_txns = rb->totalTxns;
repSlotStat.total_bytes = rb->totalBytes;
+ repSlotStat.memory_limit_hits = rb->memory_limit_hits;
Since other statistics counter names are camel cases I think it's
better to follow that for the new counter.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 10:46 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> on Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:36:38 -0700,
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > How about another idea like
I agree that adding more tests
to bitmapset.c is a good idea, I'm concerned about the minimal
improvement in test coverage despite the addition of new test cases
(only three lines of code are newly covered). Apart from adding some
randomness to the tests we've discussed, given that we're implementing
a dedicated test module for bitmapset.c, I would expect to see a more
increase in test coverage.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
if a
> transaction that it reads
> has indeed committed, but it is possible that the portion of the
> transaction log has
> been truncated by vacuum.
With your patch, since the backends get the notification by reading
WAL records do we need to prevent WAL records that potentially have
unconsumed notification from being removed by the checkpointer? Or we
can save unconsumed notifications in WAL records to somewhere during
the checkpoint as we do for 2PC transactions.
Also, could you add this patch to the next commit fest[1] if not yet?
Regards,
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/56/
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
e
* 'synced' column as true after promotion as it may provide useful
* information about the slot origin.
*/
ShutDownSlotSync();
Does the patch address the above concerns?
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 7:50 PM Sutou Kouhei wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In
> "Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations"
> on Mon, 8 Sep 2025 14:08:16 -0700,
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> >> > The fields in 1 are m
On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 11:34 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 11:14 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 8:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 1:24 AM Masahiko Sawada
On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 9:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 3:58 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 5:12 AM Shlok Kyal wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I tested the behaviour with HEAD and with Patch. And I confirmed t
On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 8:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 1:24 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 9:38 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
&g
On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 3:15 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 11:15 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > od On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 8:11 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Sawada-san,
> &
HEAD, after we restart the primary server with 'wal_level =
> replica', the slot sync worker can restart and connect to the primary
> but with patch it cannot start after restart due to the check in
> ValidateSlotSyncParams.
But the slotsync worker is launched again once logical decoding is
enabled, no? I'm not sure that we want to launch the slotsync worker
also when we know logical decoding is not enabled.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 11:15 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> od On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 8:11 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Sawada-san,
> >
> > Here are my comments.
> >
> > 01.
> > ```
> > checkPoint.logicalDecoding
lar to the case where we launch an apply worker
even for a subscription corresponding to empty publications. It would
be quite a rare case in practice where publications have only
sequences. I guess that it would rather simplify the patch if we can
cut the part of doing the sync during the command (i.
gt; > }
> >
> > search_pos++;
> > }
> > ```
> >
> > It looks like that if the entry in sequences_to_copy is skipped, it won't be
> > referred anymore. I feel this
would stop at the loop in
> start_logical_decoding_status_change().
> 10. detached from the startup process. It would wait all processes handled the
> signal, but the backend won't do.
Good find! I'll fix the problem by adding CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() as
you suggested.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 9:38 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > I've attached the updated patch.
> >
>
> Few comments:
Thank you for the comments!
> =
> 1.
> + * When XLogL
On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 5:48 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 5:08 PM Nathan Bossart
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 03:38:13PM -0700, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > While reading walsummarizer.c code, I noticed that in
> > &g
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/17/protocol-logical-replication.html#PROTOCOL-LOGICAL-REPLICATION-PARAMS
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
es a logical slot. I think that it's prudent to
mention the minimum requirement to enable logical decoding in the
hint.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
heck
whether a process can start logical decoding, but doesn't cover
already running logical decoding processes. The slot invalidation
mechanism is responsible for that.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 4:29 AM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 12:12 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 2:32 AM shveta malik wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 12:54 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > >
> > DETAIL: User was using a logical replication slot that must be
> > > invalidated.
> > > ```
> > >
> > > Can we stop the sync worker before updating the status? IIUC this is one
> > > of the
> > > solution.
> >
> > I think it would lead to another race condition; the slotsync worker
> > can start again before updating the status.
>
> Hmm, okay.
>
> Another small comment: this data structure is not used in other files, no
> need to set extern.
>
> ```
> extern LogicalDecodingCtlData *LogicalDecodingCtl;
> ```
Removed.
I've attached the updated patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
v12-0001-Enable-logical-decoding-dynamically-based-on-log.patch
Description: Binary data
.
> Also, the first "streaming" can have a link to the pgoutput's manual.
> Attached patch fixes like that.
Looks good to me. I'm going to push the patch, barring any objections.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 2:45 AM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
>
> Hi Masahiko,
> Thanks for your inputs.
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 2:17 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 5:40 AM Ashutosh Bapat
> > wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for starting t
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 12:42 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> > On 26 Aug 2025, at 00:38, Jacob Champion
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 3:22 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> For instance, we could
> >> intro
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 8:55 AM Melanie Plageman
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 12:06 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-07-22 11:44:29 -0700, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > Do you think it makes sense to implement the above idea that we launch
> > &
logical slot on the primary server.
> CONTEXT: WAL redo at 0/03B8 for XLOG/LOGICAL_DECODING_STATUS_CHANGE:
> false
> ERROR: canceling statement due to conflict with recovery
> DETAIL: User was using a logical replication slot that must be invalidated.
> ```
>
> Can we stop the sync worker before updating the status? IIUC this is one of
> the
> solution.
I think it would lead to another race condition; the slotsync worker
can start again before updating the status.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 2:32 AM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 12:54 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > I've attached the updated patch that incorporated the comments and is
> > rebased to the current HEAD.
> >
>
> Thanks for the
On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 5:08 PM Nathan Bossart wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 03:38:13PM -0700, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > While reading walsummarizer.c code, I noticed that in
> > WakeupWalSummarizer() we acquire the WALSummarizerLock lock in
> > LW_EXCLUSIVE m
clined toward the latter solution, though I have
yet to implement it. I welcome any feedback on these approaches.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
rds,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
v1-0001-Use-LW_SHARED-in-WakeupWalSummarizer-for-WALSumma.patch
Description: Binary data
On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 1:07 PM Jacob Champion
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 11:30 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > > Gathering a couple of considerations from upthread:
> > > - FIPS behavior
> >
> > Do you mean random numbers generated by getra
the effectiveness of the filters they
set.
> If we are going
> to report so much statistics about the contents of the reorder buffer,
> is it better to have a separate view pg_stat_reorder_buffer for the
> same?
Given logical decoding can be used also by regular backend processes,
can allow use of "sync_replication_slots"
> = on when wal_level >= replica as standby will be dependent on
> effective_wal_level on primary. Thoughts?
> I also see that with patch, the use of pg_sync_replication_slots()
> works with wal_level = replica.
Good point. I ag
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 8:38 AM Jacob Champion
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 3:16 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:37 PM Jacob Champion
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So, my next question: is getrandom() always preferable to /dev/ur
On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 8:11 PM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 10:34 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 3:11 AM shveta malik wrote:
> > >
> > > Please find a few comments:
> >
> > T
aintain such a list when in practice it may be
> required only very few times.
Yeah, something like clock-sweep could work too. I think we need to
carefully select the cache management algorithm. While it's a well
known fact that maintaining LRU ordering is expensive, I'm really not
sure the clock-sweep is a suitable algorithm for logical replication's
cache use cases. Also, we might want to avoid iterating all caches to
find caches to evict.
Regards,
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20161219.201505.11562604.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
xid, age(datfrozenxid)
from pg_database"
datname | datfrozenxid | age
---+--+-
postgres | 1759 | 11
template0 | 1759 | 11
template1 | 1759 | 11
(3 rows)
7. On the first psql session:
-- Session 1
=# commit;
COMMIT
ERROR: could not access status of transaction 756
DETAIL: Could not open file "pg_xact/": No such file or directory.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 9:04 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 11:00 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 9:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> > >
> > > If so, I don't think we can do much with the design
> > >
On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 3:50 AM Shlok Kyal wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 at 04:38, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 1:26 AM Shlok Kyal wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Sawada-san,
> > >
> > > I have reviewed the pa
t.
>
> 6)
>
> +test_wal_level($primary, "replica|replica",
> + "effective_wal_level got decreased to 'replica' on primary");
> +test_wal_level($standby3, "logical|replica",
> + "effective_wal_level got decreased to 'replica' on standby");
> +test_wal_level($cascade, "replica|replica",
> + "effective_wal_level got decreased to 'logical' on standby");
> +
>
> Last one should also say: decreased to 'replica' (instead of logical)
Fixed.
I've attached the updated patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
v8-0001-Enable-logical-decoding-dynamically-based-on-logi.patch
Description: Binary data
On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 9:14 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 11:33 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 1:44 AM vignesh C wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Case 2: Sequence value Conflict While Applyi
exceeds a predetermined size. While
this approach would minimize the overhead of freeing invalidated
entries, it would incur some additional cost for maintaining the list.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 10:06 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 5:15 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > Regarding the subscription-level option vs. GUC, I don't disagree with
> > the current approach.
> >
> > For the record, while I ag
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 11:59 AM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 12:04 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 2:33 AM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Masahiko,
>&g
On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 1:44 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 at 06:47, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 4:21 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > For example, if a sequence is dropped
> > > on the publis
ue entries aren't ordered by XID, and it's possible
for a notification with an older XID to be positioned at the queue's
head. If vacuum freeze then truncates the corresponding clogs,
listeners attempting to retrieve this notification would fail to
obtain the transaction status. To add
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 4:21 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> For example, if a sequence is dropped
> on the publisher, the subscriber would encounter synchronization
> failures unless the DROP SEQUENCE is properly applied.
This example is wrong. It seems DROP SEQUENCE works but w
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 2:13 AM vignesh C wrote:
>
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 at 14:15, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > As I understand it, the logical replication of sequences implemented
> > by these patches shares the same user interface as table replication
> > (ut
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 1:31 AM Daniil Davydov <3daniss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:41 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
>
> > 2. when an autovacuum worker (not parallel vacuum worker) who uses
> > parallel vacuum gets SIGHUP,
check has been removed from
> >LogicalRepSyncSequences() and added to copy_sequences() for the
> >SetSequence() call.
> >
> >However, IIUC, the same check is also needed in
> >LogicalRepSyncSequences(). Currently, the sequencesync worker can fail
> >in the above
introduced these typos.
> Please take a look at the attached patch.
Thank you for the patch! I've just pushed it.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
not merge these two parameters? For
example, setting max_conflict_retention_duration=-1 means to disable
retaining dead tuples behavior and =0 means that dead tuples are
retained until they are no longer needed for detection purposes.
---
+ /*
+* Only the leader apply worker manages
On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 2:33 AM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
wrote:
>
> Hi Masahiko,
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 4:57 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:59 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 4:
On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 11:44 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 5:10 AM Erik Nordström wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 11:52 AM Andrey Borodin
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Erik!
> >>
> >> &g
; > calculation is still correct.
>>
>> Wow, that's a very good level of proofreading! Yes, you are correct, it's
>> must be US_PER_MS.
>>
>> >
>> > Anyway, attaching a patch to fix this typo.
>>
>> LGTM.
>
>
> Ok, maybe a
es need to be replicated to the
subscriber? It seems to me that if tables are present in short periods
of time, we can use temp tables instead unless these changes need to
be replicated to the subscribers.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
relation whose change is being sent but does for other
relations. It seems to me too aggressive to release caches compared to
the current behavior.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
once the entry is no longer in use. This approach is
> inspired from the relcache invalidation. I am slightly not sure if it's worth
> the effort, but just share this idea with a POC patch for reference, which has
> been modified based on Kuroda-San's version.
IIUC the pat
On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:59 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 4:31 PM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> wrote:
> >
> > Please find attached patch that adds CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS while scanning
> > the buffers in pg_buffercache_pages. I checked other funct
are invalidated on the standby.
> With patch this behaviour can be indirectly controlled by a temporary
> slot. Is it fine? Thoughts?
Your understanding is correct. I've discussed whether we need a way to
keep auto-increased 'logical' WAL level on the primary when standbys
have logical slots. You mentioned temporary logical slots cases but I
think the same is true for the case where users accidentally drop the
last logical slot.
My understanding is that it's fine that logical decoding availability
on standbys is controlled by primary's logical slots (including temp
slots) presence. This essentially is the same behavior as the current
one and users who are concerned about indirectly invalidating the
logical slots on standbys can set wal_level to 'logical' on the
primary. It's a separate discussion (and patch) whether we need to
provide a way for users to keep auto-increased 'logical' WAL level on
the primary.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:37 PM Jacob Champion
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 3:25 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On the other hand, I found a blog post[3] (10 years-old post) that on
> > Solaris the output of getentropy() should not be used where randomness
> > is n
er than other methods. For larger bytes (such
1024), openssl had the best performance. This fact is very attractive
to me in terms of using it for UUID generation.
Regards,
[1] https://dotat.at/@/2024-10-01-getentropy.html
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
bench.c
Description: Binary data
On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 4:38 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:45 PM Daniil Davydov <3daniss...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:40 PM Sami Imseih wrote:
> > >
> > > I have only revie
nge. I'm not sure if
there are any users who aware of this behavior and depend on it, but
it seems to me that for users who update to a new minor version having
this change, the problem will simply change from that replication
stops due to missing publications to that replication can continue but
they will almost silently lose some changes (users often don't see
warnings in server logs). I guess dealing with the latter problem
would be more difficult.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
-src/blob/main/lib/libc/gen/getentropy.c
[3]
https://blogs.oracle.com/solaris/post/solaris-new-system-calls-getentropy2-and-getrandom2
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
.
Thank you for the patch!
I think the patch is reasonable and it looks good to me. I'll push it
to master early next week, barring objections.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
adjust_free_parallel_workers() but
av_freeParallelWorkers remains 0, and the autovacuum worker increments
it by 5 as its autovacuum_max_parallel_workers value is still 5.
I think that we can have the autovacuum_max_parallel_workers value on
shmem, and only the launcher process can modify its value if the GUC
is changed. Autovacuum workers simply increase or decrease the
av_freeParallelWorkers within the range of 0 and the
autovacuum_max_parallel_workers value on shmem. When changing
autovacuum_max_parallel_workers and av_freeParallelWorkers values on
shmem, the launcher process calculates the number of workers reserved
at that time and calculate the new av_freeParallelWorkers value by
subtracting the new autovacuum_max_parallel_workers by the number of
reserved workers.
---
+AutoVacuumReserveParallelWorkers(int nworkers)
+{
+ int can_launch;
How about renaming it to 'nreserved' or something? can_launch looks
like it's a boolean variable to indicate whether the process can
launch workers.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
he system.
>
> The comment is not completely true, shall we amend the comment to say
> something like:
>
> This function is called after a logical slot is dropped, but it only
> disables logical decoding on primary if it was the last remaining
> logical slot and wal_level < logical. Otherwise, it performs no
> action.
Thank you for the suggestion. I modified the comment based on the suggestion
>
> 10)
> When we try to create or drop a logical slot on standby, and if
> delay_status_change is false, shall we immediately exit? Currently it
> does a lot of checks including CheckLogicalSlotExists() which can be
> completely avoided. I think it is worth having a quick
> 'RecoveryInProgress() && !delay_status_change' check in the beginning.
Yeah, we can simplify the start_logical_decoding_status_change() logic more.
I've attached the updated patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
v7-0001-Enable-logical-decoding-dynamically-based-on-logi.patch
Description: Binary data
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 3:11 AM shveta malik wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 5:14 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 3:38 AM shveta malik wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Aug 2, 2025 at 4:53 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > > wrote:
&g
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 3:07 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 2:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Masahiko Sawada writes:
> > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 1:59 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Maybe there's some strange cross-distro differen
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 2:39 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Masahiko Sawada writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 1:59 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Maybe there's some strange cross-distro difference here, but
> >> what I'm wondering is if there's a difference i
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 1:59 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Masahiko Sawada writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Interesting. I did not see such warnings with gcc 14.3.1, 15.1.1,
> >> nor older gcc versions. Must be something peculiar to 1
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Masahiko Sawada writes:
> > I got the following compiler warning:
>
> > % make -C src/backend/storage/large_object
> > inv_api.c: In function ‘inv_write’:
> > inv_api.c:565:29: warning: ‘workbuf’ may b
On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 1:57 AM Yugo Nagata wrote:
>
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2025 16:12:15 -0700
> Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > The patch seems reasonably simple and looks good to me. I've updated
> > the comment in bbsink_progress_new() and attached the modified versi
1 - 100 of 1939 matches
Mail list logo
