On Thurs, Jan 19, 2023 at 19:18 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 4:20 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > When I was reading the "Logical Decoding Output Plugins" chapter in pg-doc
> [1],
> > I think in the summary section, only the call
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 19:37 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 4:13 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 6:00 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >
> > > + */
> > > + ReorderBufferUpdateProgressCB update_progress;
> > >
> > > Are you suggesting changing the name of the
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 12:35 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 7:40 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > Here are some review comments for patch v3-0001.
> >
> > ==
> > src/backend/replication/logical/logical.c
> >
> > 3. forward declaration
> >
> > +/* update progress callback */
> >
On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:10 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for patch v3-0001.
Thanks for your comments.
> ==
> Commit message
>
> 1.
> The problem is when there is a DDL in a transaction that generates lots of
> temporary data due to rewrite rules, these temporary d
On Tues, Jan 24, 2023 at 8:28 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Hi Hou-san, Here are my review comments for v5-0001.
Thanks for your comments.
> ==
> src/backend/replication/logical/reorderbuffer.c
>
> 1.
> @@ -2446,6 +2452,23 @@ ReorderBufferProcessTXN(ReorderBuffer *rb,
> ReorderBufferTXN *txn,
>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 19:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 5:18 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 7:26 PM Amit Kapila
>
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 8:15 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
>
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 11:37 AM Shi, Yu/侍 雨 wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 3:41 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > I tested a mix transaction of transactional and non-transactional messages
> > on
> > the current HEAD and reproduced the timeout proble
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 14:55 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:36 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 11:37 AM Shi, Yu/侍 雨
> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 3:41 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrote:
> &
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 17:50 PM I wrote:
> Attach the new patch.
When invoking the function ReorderBufferProcessTXN, the threshold-related
counter "changes_count" may have some random value from the previous
transaction's processing. To fix this, I moved the definition of the counter
"changes_cou
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 21:00 PM Melih Mutlu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your review.
> Attached updated versions of the patches.
Thanks for updating the patch set.
> > 5. New member "created_slot" in structure LogicalRepWorker
> > + /*
> > +* Indicates if the sync worker created a r
On Tues, Jan 31, 2023 18:27 PM I wrote:
> I found one typo in v9-0002, but it seems already mentioned by Shi in [1].#5
> before. Maybe you can have a look at that email for this and some other
> comments.
Sorry, I forgot to add the link to the email. Please refer to [1].
[1] -
https://www.postgr
On Thurs, Feb 2, 2023 16:04 PM Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu)
wrote:
> Attached the updated patch v26 accordingly.
Thanks for your patch.
Here is a comment:
1. The checks in function AlterSubscription
+ /*
+* The combinat
On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 20:07 PM Melih Mutlu wrote:
> Thanks for pointing out this review. I somehow skipped that, sorry.
>
> Please see attached patches.
Thanks for updating the patch set.
Here are some comments.
1. In the function ApplyWorkerMain.
+ /* This is main apply wor
On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 15:37 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:41 PM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > We need to think of a predictable
> > > way to test this path which may not be difficult. But I guess it would
> > > be b
On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 4:29 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-11-16 08:58:31 +, wangw.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > Attach the new patch set.
>
> This patch causes several of the tests to fail. See e.g.:
>
> https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6587624765259776
>
&g
On Thur, Feb 7, 2023 15:29 PM I wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 20:07 PM Melih Mutlu wrote:
> > Thanks for pointing out this review. I somehow skipped that, sorry.
> >
> > Please see attached patches.
>
> Thanks for updating the patch set.
> Here are some comments.
Hi, here are some more comments o
Hi,
When I refer to the GUC "max_locks_per_transaction", I find that the description
of the shared lock table size in pg-doc[1] is inconsistent with the code
(guc_table.c). BTW, the GUC "max_predicate_locks_per_xact" has similar problems.
I think the descriptions in pg-doc are correct.
- GUC "max
On Thur, Feb 14, 2023 at 2:03 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2023-02-13 14:06:57 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > The patch calls update_progress in change_cb_wrapper and other
> > > > wrappers which will miss the case of DDLs that generates a lot of data
> > > > that is not processed by the plugin
On Thur, Sep 22, 2022 at 18:12 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> Few comments on v33-0001
> ===
Thanks for your comments.
> 1.
> + else if (data->streaming == SUBSTREAM_PARALLEL &&
> + data->protocol_version <
> LOGICALREP_PROTO_STREAM_PARALLEL_VERSION_NUM)
> + ereport(ERROR,
> + (errc
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 10:31 AM Osumi, Takamichi/大墨 昂道
wrote:
> Hi, thank you for updating the patchset.
>
>
> FYI, I noticed that the patch for head is no longer applicable.
Thanks for your kindly reminder and comment.
> $ git apply --check HEAD_v10-0001-Fix-data-replicated-twice-when-speci
Hi,
I tried to use meson and ninja and they are really efficient.
But when I tried to specify "c_args", it did not take effect.
Attached my steps:
[In the HEAD (7d708093b7)]
$ meson setup build --prefix /home/wangw/install/parallel_apply/ -Dcassert=true
-Dtap_tests=enabled -Dicu=enabled -Dc_args
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 14:47 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-09-26 06:24:42 +, wangw.f...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > I tried to use meson and ninja and they are really efficient.
> > But when I tried to specify "c_args", it did not take effect.
>
&g
On Tues, Sep 27, 2022 at 16:45 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are my review comments for the HEAD_v11-0001 patch:
Thanks for your comments.
> ==
>
> 1. General - Another related bug?
>
> In [1] Hou-san wrote:
>
> For another case you mentioned (via_root used when publishing child)
> CREATE
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 11:08 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Hi Wang-san. Here are my review comments for HEAD_v12-0001 patch.
Thanks for your comments.
> ==
>
> 1. Missing documentation.
>
> In [1] you wrote:
> > I think the behaviour of multiple publications with parameter
> publish_via_partitio
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 23:05 PM Osumi, Takamichi/大墨 昂道
wrote:
> Hi, thank you for the updated patches!
>
>
> Here are my minor review comments for HEAD v12.
Thanks for your comments.
> (1) typo & suggestion to reword one comment
>
>
> +* Publications support partitio
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 0:14 AM Önder Kalacı wrote:
> Hii Wang wei,
Thanks for updating the patch and your reply.
> > 1. In the function GetCheapestReplicaIdentityFullPath.
> > + if (rel->pathlist == NIL)
> > + {
> > + /*
> > +* A sequential scan could have been dominat
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 22:35 PM Fabrice Chapuis
wrote:
> Hello Amit,
>
> In version 14.4 the timeout problem for logical replication happens again
> despite
> the patch provided for this issue in this version. When bulky materialized
> views
> are reloaded it broke logical replication. It is p
On Thurs, Oct 20, 2022 at 13:47 PM Fabrice Chapuis
wrote:
> Yes the refresh of MV is on the Publisher Side.
> Thanks for your draft patch, I'll try it
> I'll back to you as soonas possible
Thanks a lot.
> One question: why the refresh of the MV is a DDL not a DML?
Since in the source, the type
On Thur, Apr 28, 2022 at 6:26 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 3:21 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
>
> I think it is better to keep the new variable 'end_xact' at the end of
> the struct where it belongs for HEAD. In back branches, we ca
On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 9:54 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 7:18 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 8:07 AM Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 11:32 AM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > So, shall we go back to the previous
On Tue, Apr 28, 2022 9:22 AM Shi, Yu/侍 雨 wrote:
> Thanks for your patches.
>
> Here's a comment on the patch for REL14.
Thanks for your comments.
> + appendStringInfo(&cmd, "SELECT DISTINCT ns.nspname, c.relname\n"
> + " FROM
> pg_catalog.pg_publication_t
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 11:23 AM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 7:01 PM Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 9, 2022, at 3:47 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Thanks. The patch LGTM. I'll push and back-patch this after the
> > current minor release is done unless there are more comm
On Thur, May 12, 2022 9:48 AM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 11:33 AM I wrote:
> > On Monday, May 9, 2022 10:51 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > > Attach new patches.
> > > The patch for HEAD:
> > > 1. Modify
On Fri, May 13, 2022 1:59 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 7:32 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > Attach the patches.(Only changed the patch for HEAD.).
> >
>
> Few comments:
> =
Thanks for your comm
On Tues, May 17, 2022 9:03 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 3:11 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > Attach the patches.(Only changed the patch for HEAD.).
> >
Thanks for your comments.
> # publications
> -{ oid => '6119', de
On Fri, May 13, 2022 10:57 PM Osumi, Takamichi/大墨 昂道
wrote:
> On Friday, May 13, 2022 6:42 PM Wang, Wei/王 威
> wrote:
> > Attach the patches.(Only changed the patch for HEAD.).
> > 1. Optimize the code. Reduce calls to function filter_partitions.
> > [suggestions by Amit-san] 2. Improve the alias
On Wed, May 18, 2022 4:38 PM I wrote:
> Attach the patches.(Only changed the patch for HEAD.)
Sorry, I forgot to update commit message.
Attach the new patch.
1. Only update the commit message for HEAD_v5.
Regards,
Wang wei
HEAD_v5-0001-Fix-data-replicated-twice-when-specifying-PUBLISH.patch
Des
On Mon, May 30, 2022 7:38 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> Few comments/suggestions for 0001 and 0003
> =
> 0001
>
Thanks for your comments.
> 1.
> + else
> + snprintf(bgw.bgw_name, BGW_MAXLEN,
> + "logical replication apply worker for subscription %u", subid);
On Sun, May 29, 2022 8:25 PM osumi.takami...@fujitsu.com
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Some review comments on the new patches from v6-0001 to v6-0004.
Thanks for your comments.
>
>
> (1) create_subscription.sgml
>
> + the transaction is committed. Note that if an error happens when
> +
On Mon, Jun 21, 2022 at 9:41 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for the v11-0001 patch.
>
> (I will review the remaining patches 0002-0005 and post any comments later)
>
Thanks for your comments.
> 6. doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml
>
> Since there are protocol changes made here
On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 9:41 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for v12-0002
Thanks for your comments.
> 3. .../subscription/t/022_twophase_cascade.pl
>
> For every test file in this patch the new function is passed $is_apply
> = 0/1 to indicate to use 'on' or 'apply' paramet
On Tues, Jun 28, 2022 at 12:15 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 8:51 AM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 16:44 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 12:51 PM wangw.f...@fujitsu.com
> > > wrot
On Wed, May 18, 2022 4:51 PM I wrote:
> Attach the new patch.
Since there are some new commits in HEAD (0ff20288, fd0b9dc and 52b5c53) that
improve the functions pg_get_publication_tables and fetch_table_list, we cannot
apply the patch cleanly. Therefore, I rebased the patch based on the changes i
On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 17:44 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
Thanks for your comments.
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 12:13 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > ==
> >
> > 1.2 doc/src/sgml/protocol.sgml - Protocol constants
> >
> > Previously I wrote that since there are protocol changes here,
> > shouldn’t ther
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 12:12 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Below are some review comments for patch v14-0003:
Thanks for your comments.
> 3.1 Commit message
>
> If any of the following checks are violated, an error will be reported.
> 1. The unique columns between publisher and subscriber are differe
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 14:47 AM Peter Smith wrote:
> Below are some review comments for patch v14-0004:
Thanks for your comments.
> 4.0 General.
>
> This comment is an after-thought but as I write this mail I am
> wondering if most of this 0004 patch is even necessary at all? Instead
> of intro
On Thur, Jul 14, 2022 at 12:46 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for the v6 patch (HEAD only):
Thanks for your comments.
> 1. Commit message
>
> If there are two publications that publish the parent table and the child
> table
> separately, and both specify the option PUBLI
On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 1:28 AM vignesh C wrote:
> Added a note for the same and referred it to the conflicts section.
>
> Thanks for the comments, the attached v38 patch has the changes for the same.
Thanks for your patches.
Two slight comments on the below message in the 0001 patch:
The error
On Thurs, Jul 28, 2022 at 13:20 PM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人
wrote:
>
> Dear Wang-san,
>
> Hi, I'm also interested in the patch and I started to review this.
> Followings are comments about 0001.
Thanks for your kindly review and comments.
To avoid making this thread too long, I will reply to all of
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 16:03 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for the patch v19-0004:
Thanks for your kindly review and comments.
To avoid making this thread too long, I will reply to all of your comments
(0001-patch ~ 0004-patch) in this email.
In addition, in order not to
On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 21:50 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> Few comments on 0001:
> ==
Thanks for your comments.
> 1.
> - substream bool
> + substream char
>
>
> - If true, the subscription will allow streaming of in-progress
> - transactions
On Thur, Jul 28, 2022 at 17:17 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for the HEAD_v7-0001 patch:
Thanks for your comments.
> 2. Commit message.
>
> 2a.
>
> If there are two publications that publish the parent table and the child
> table
> separately, and both specify the opti
On Fri, August 12, 2022 17:22 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comments for v20-0004:
>
> (This completes my reviews of the v20* patch set. Sorry, the reviews
> are time consuming, so I am lagging slightly behind the latest posted
> version)
Thanks for your comments.
> 1. doc/src/sg
On Tues, Aug 9, 2022 at 15:15 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are some review comment for the HEAD_v8 patch:
Thanks for your comments.
> 1. Commit message
>
> If there are two publications, one of them publish a parent table with
> (publish_via_partition_root = true) and another publish child tabl
On Tues, 6 Sept 2022 at 11:14, vignesh C wrote:
> Thanks for the comments, the attached patch has the changes for the same.
Thanks for updating the patch.
Here is one comment for 0001 patch.
1. The query in function check_publications_origin.
+ appendStringInfoString(&cmd,
+
On Thur, Sep 8, 2022 at 19:25 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 12:21 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 6:34 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Attach the correct patch set this time.
> > >
> >
> > Few comments on v28-0001*:
> > =
On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 15:02 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> Here are my review comments for the v28-0001 patch:
>
> (There may be some overlap with other people's review comments and/or
> some fixes already made).
Thanks for your comments.
> 5. src/backend/libpq/pqmq.c
>
> + {
> + if (IsParallelWorke
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 18:58 PM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人
wrote:
> Dear Hou-san,
>
> Thank you for updating the patch! Followings are comments for v28-0001.
> I will dig your patch more, but I send partially to keep the activity of the
> thread.
Thanks for your comments.
> ===
> For applyparallel
On Tues, Sep 13, 2022 at 17:49 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
Thanks for your comments.
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 2:31 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com
> wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, September 9, 2022 3:02 PM Peter Smith
> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > 3.
> > >
> > > max_logical_replication_workers (integer)
> > >
On Wed, Sep 13, 2022 at 18:26 PM Amit Kapila wrote:
>
Thanks for your comments.
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 12:32 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > 29. src/backend/replication/logical/worker.c - TransactionApplyAction
> >
> > /*
> > * What action to take for the transaction.
> > *
> > * TA_APPLY_IN
On Tues, Sep 13, 2022 at 20:02 PM Kuroda, Hayato/黒田 隼人
wrote:
> Dear Hou-san,
>
> > I will dig your patch more, but I send partially to keep the activity of
> > the thread.
>
> More minor comments about v28.
Thanks for your comments.
> ===
> About 0002
>
> For 015_stream.pl
>
> 14. check_p
On Mon, Sept 19, 2022 at 14:52 PM Peter Smith wrote:
> FYI, I'm not sure why the cfbot hasn't reported this, but the apply v9
> patch failed for me on HEAD as below:
>
> [postgres@CentOS7-x64 oss_postgres_misc]$ git apply
> ../patches_misc/HEAD_v9-0001-Fix-data-replicated-twice-when-specifying-
>
> FYI -
>
> The latest patch 30-0001 fails to apply, it seems due to a recent commit [1].
>
> [postgres@CentOS7-x64 oss_postgres_misc]$ git apply
> ../patches_misc/v30-0001-Perform-streaming-logical-transactions-by-
> parall.patch
> error: patch failed: src/include/replication/logicalproto.h:246
On Tues, Sep 20, 2022 at 18:30 PM Önder Kalacı wrote:
> Thanks for the reviews, attached v12.
Thanks for your patch. Here is a question and a comment:
1. In the function GetCheapestReplicaIdentityFullPath.
+ if (rel->pathlist == NIL)
+ {
+ /*
+* A sequen
101 - 164 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
