Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node
От | vignesh C |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CALDaNm06js8MW9pgRaJkbmCBLwCoKqLyNUbqXEd4vCKV-QoLdA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node ("Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
RE: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 at 16:16, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Dear Vignesh, > > Thanks for revieing! New patch can be available in [1]. > > > Few comments: > > 1) Even if we comment 3rd point "Emit a non-transactional message", > > test_slot2 still appears in the invalid_logical_replication_slots.txt > > file. There is something wrong here. > > + # 2. Advance the slot test_slot2 up to the current WAL location, but > > + # test_slot1 still has unconsumed WAL records. > > + $old_publisher->safe_psql('postgres', > > + "SELECT pg_replication_slot_advance('test_slot2', NULL);"); > > + > > + # 3. Emit a non-transactional message. test_slot2 detects the message > > so > > + # that this slot will be also reported by upcoming pg_upgrade. > > + $old_publisher->safe_psql('postgres', > > + "SELECT count(*) FROM pg_logical_emit_message('false', > > 'prefix', 'This is a non-transactional message');" > > + ); > > The comment was updated based on others. How do you think? I mean if we comment or remove this statement like in the attached patch, the test is still passing with 'The slot "test_slot2" has not consumed the WAL yet', in this case should the test_slot2 be still invalid as we have called pg_replication_slot_advance for test_slot2. Regards, Vignesh
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: