Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1JMn8x2hGU9W_tgqFz0dYVE3Ro6HQEL7HHXiZ2_ZC=FvA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Dropping publication breaks logical replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 5:06 PM Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 4:03 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Now, seeing this report, it seems the customer(s) are probably okay to > > skip a missing publication and let replication continue. So, we should > > consider backpatching this change but it would be better if few more > > people can share their opinion on this matter. > > Including Tomas for his opinion. Who else do you think can provide an > opinion based on experience? > I don't have any particular names in mind but Dilip and Sawada-San names are listed as reviewers in the commit [1], so it would be good to see what are their thoughts on this. Please note that this behavior is from the time logical replication was introduced, so we need to be a bit careful in changing the behavior in backbranches. [1] - https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=7c99dc587a010a0c40d72a0e435111ca7a371c02 -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: