Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2
От | Jonathan S. Katz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 40ccfb89-84b0-a8bf-2402-bf32ab0d7bdd@postgresql.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: logical decoding and replication of sequences, take 2 (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/23/23 7:56 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 2/22/23 18:04, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: >> On 2/22/23 5:02 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: >>> >> Interestingly, in systems that tend to have higher rates of failover >> (I'm thinking of a few distributed systems), this may cause int4 >> sequences to exhaust numbers slightly (marginally?) more quickly. Likely >> not too big of an issue, but something to keep in mind. >> > > IMHO the number of systems that would work fine with int4 sequences but > this change results in the sequences being "exhausted" too quickly is > indistinguishable from 0. I don't think this is an issue. I agree it's an edge case. I do think it's a number greater than 0, having seen some incredibly flaky setups, particularly in distributed systems. I would not worry about it, but only mentioned it to try and probe edge cases. >>> Well, yeah. We don't support active-active logical replication (at least >>> not with the built-in). You can easily get into similar issues without >>> sequences. >> >> The "origin=none" feature lets you replicate tables bidirectionally. >> While it's not full "active-active", this is a starting point and a >> feature for v16. We'll definitely have users replicating data >> bidirectionally with this. >> > > Well, then the users need to use some other way to generate IDs, not > local sequences. Either some sort of distributed/global sequence, UUIDs > or something like that. [snip] >> In any case, we should update the restrictions in [2] to state: while >> sequences can be replicated, there is additional work required if you >> are bidirectionally replicating tables that use sequences, esp. if used >> in a PK or a constraint. We can provide alternatives to how a user could >> set that up, i.e. not replicates the sequences or do something like in [3]. >> > > I agree. I see this as mostly a documentation issue. Great. I agree that users need other mechanisms to generate IDs, but we should ensure we document that. If needed, I'm happy to help with the docs here. Thanks, Jonathan
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: