On 2019-Apr-05, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 05/04/2019 23:16, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > The mechanism of creating a new slot from the source, then later
> > advancing the LSN of the new slot using the updated values from the
> > source slot, seems quite clever. I reworded the comment that explained
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 6:16 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> Pushed this.
Thank you!
>
> The mechanism of creating a new slot from the source, then later
> advancing the LSN of the new slot using the updated values from the
> source slot, seems quite clever. I reworded the comment that explained
>
On 05/04/2019 23:16, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Pushed this.
>
Thanks!
> The mechanism of creating a new slot from the source, then later
> advancing the LSN of the new slot using the updated values from the
> source slot, seems quite clever. I reworded the comment that explained
> how it is suppos
Pushed this.
The mechanism of creating a new slot from the source, then later
advancing the LSN of the new slot using the updated values from the
source slot, seems quite clever. I reworded the comment that explained
how it is supposed to work; please double-check to ensure I got it
right.
I ren
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 5:26 PM David Steele wrote:
>
> On 3/11/19 5:16 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:50 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 1:00 PM Masahiko Sawada
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> BTW, XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(copy_restart_lsn) || cop
On 3/11/19 5:16 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:50 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 1:00 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
BTW, XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(copy_restart_lsn) || copy_restart_lsn <
src_restart_lsn is redundant, the former should be removed.
So attach
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 4:50 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 1:00 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > BTW, XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(copy_restart_lsn) || copy_restart_lsn <
> > src_restart_lsn is redundant, the former should be removed.
> >
>
> So attached the updated version patch
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 1:00 PM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> BTW, XLogRecPtrIsInvalid(copy_restart_lsn) || copy_restart_lsn <
> src_restart_lsn is redundant, the former should be removed.
>
So attached the updated version patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORAT
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 12:26 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 05:09:33PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 1:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Well, I'd not thought we'd do it without acquiring the other slot. But
> >> that still seems to be easy enough
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 05:09:33PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 1:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>> Well, I'd not thought we'd do it without acquiring the other slot. But
>> that still seems to be easy enough to address, we just need to recheck
>> whether the slot still exis
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 1:28 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-02-18 16:57:07 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > > Stupid question, but couldn't we optimize this to something like:
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * First copy current data of the slot. Then install those in the
> > > *
Hi,
On 2019-02-18 16:57:07 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > Stupid question, but couldn't we optimize this to something like:
> >
> > /*
> > * First copy current data of the slot. Then install those in the
> > * new slot. The src slot could have progressed while installing,
> >
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 12:34 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
Thank you for your comment.
> On 2019-01-15 10:56:04 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> > + pg_copy_physical_replication_slot
> > +
> > +
> > pg_copy_physical_replication_slot(src_slot_name
> > name, dst_slot
Hi,
On 2019-01-15 10:56:04 +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> + pg_copy_physical_replication_slot
> +
> +
> pg_copy_physical_replication_slot(src_slot_name
> name, dst_slot_name ,
> temporary
> bool)
> +
> +
> +(slot_name name,
> lsn pg_lsn)
> +
Hi,
On 15/01/2019 02:56, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 3:46 AM Petr Jelinek
> wrote:
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> +* The requested wal lsn is no longer available. We don't
>>> want to retry
>>> +* it, so raise an error.
>>> +
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 3:46 AM Petr Jelinek
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 26/11/2018 01:29, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 12:27 AM Petr Jelinek
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> The more serious thing is:
> >>
> >>> + if (MyReplicationSlot)
> >>> + ReplicationSlotRelease();
> >>>
Hi,
On 26/11/2018 01:29, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 12:27 AM Petr Jelinek
> wrote:
>>
>> The more serious thing is:
>>
>>> + if (MyReplicationSlot)
>>> + ReplicationSlotRelease();
>>> +
>>> + /* Release the saved slot if exist while preventing double rele
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 12:27 AM Petr Jelinek
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 31/08/2018 07:03, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> >
> > Attached a new version patch incorporated the all comments I got.
> >
>
> This looks pretty reasonable.
Thank you for looking at this patch.
>
> I am personally not big fan of the
Hi,
On 31/08/2018 07:03, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> Attached a new version patch incorporated the all comments I got.
>
This looks pretty reasonable.
I am personally not big fan of the C wrappers for overloaded functions,
but that's what we need to do for opr_sanity to pass so I guess we'll
ha
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:34 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:14:04PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> I think the copying from a slot that already reserved WAL would be
>>> helpful for backup cases (maybe you sug
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:34 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:14:04PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> I think the copying from a slot that already reserved WAL would be
>> helpful for backup cases (maybe you suggested?). Also, either way we
>> need to make a safe logic of
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:14:04PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I think the copying from a slot that already reserved WAL would be
> helpful for backup cases (maybe you suggested?). Also, either way we
> need to make a safe logic of acquring and releasing the source slot
> for logical slots case
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 01:38:23PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada
>> wrote:
>>> Attached new version of patch incorporated the all comments I got from
>>> Michael-san.
>>>
>>> To prevent
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 01:38:23PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>> Attached new version of patch incorporated the all comments I got from
>> Michael-san.
>>
>> To prevent the WAL segment file of restart_lsn of the origin slot from
>> re
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:06:00AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> I think that this patch might be splitted but I will be able to send
>>> an updated patch in the next week. As
On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:06:00AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> I think that this patch might be splitted but I will be able to send
>> an updated patch in the next week. As you suggestion this patch needs
>> more careful thoughts. I'll
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:06:00AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I think that this patch might be splitted but I will be able to send
> an updated patch in the next week. As you suggestion this patch needs
> more careful thoughts. I'll move this patch to the next commit fest if
> I will not be ab
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 05:24:48PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> Yes, you're right. To guarantee that restart LSN of copied slot is
>> available, it seems to me that it's better to copy new slot while
>> holding the origin slot as you men
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 05:24:48PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Yes, you're right. To guarantee that restart LSN of copied slot is
> available, it seems to me that it's better to copy new slot while
> holding the origin slot as you mentioned before. Since the replication
> slot creation code ass
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 4:47 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 05:27:07PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> One property which seems important to me is to make sure that the target
>>> slot has the same data as the origin
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 05:27:07PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> One property which seems important to me is to make sure that the target
>> slot has the same data as the origin slot once the caller knows that the
>> copy has completed, a
On 28 June 2018 at 10:51, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to propose a copy function for logical replication slots.
> Currently when we create a new logical replication slot it starts to
> read WAL from an LSN of the current insert. This function copies a
> exist
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 04:31:32PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> Attached an updated patch including copy function support for logical
>> slots as well as physical slots. Please review it.
>
> I had a look at this patch.
Thank you for th
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 04:31:32PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Attached an updated patch including copy function support for logical
> slots as well as physical slots. Please review it.
I had a look at this patch.
As the output plugin can be changed for logical slots, having two
functions is
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 7:10 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 5:37 PM, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>> On 6/28/18 08:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
> There could be some cases where
> copying a physical slot also makes sense.
I've thought that but I didn't find concrete
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 5:37 PM, Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> On 6/28/18 08:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
There could be some cases where
copying a physical slot also makes sense.
>>> I've thought that but I didn't find concrete use case. That's why I
>>> started with only logical slot.
>> Let
On 6/28/18 08:47, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> There could be some cases where
>>> copying a physical slot also makes sense.
>> I've thought that but I didn't find concrete use case. That's why I
>> started with only logical slot.
> Let's imagine the case of a single base backup which is associated t
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 03:34:00PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:29 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Hm. Shouldn't the original slot copied be owned by the process doing
>> the copy with ReplicationSlotAcquire?
>
> Right, it should do and release it before creating new o
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:29 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:51:20AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> A use case I imagined is for investigations for example. I mean that
>> when replication collision occurs on subscriber there is no way to see
>> what replicated data is c
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:51:20AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> A use case I imagined is for investigations for example. I mean that
> when replication collision occurs on subscriber there is no way to see
> what replicated data is conflicting (perhaps error log helps it but is
> not detailed) a
Hi,
I'd like to propose a copy function for logical replication slots.
Currently when we create a new logical replication slot it starts to
read WAL from an LSN of the current insert. This function copies a
existing logical replication slot while changing output plugin and
persistence. Th
41 matches
Mail list logo
