On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:14 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:00 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:55 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 6:14 PM Petr Jelinek <p...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > If we were to support the origin forwarding, then strictly speaking we > > > > need everything only at commit time from correctness perspective, > > > > > > > > > > Okay. Anyway streaming mode is optional, so in such cases, we can keep > > > it 'off' > > > > > > > but > > > > ideally origin_id would be best sent with first message as it can be > > > > used to filter out changes at decoding stage rather than while we > > > > process the commit so having it set early improves performance of > > > > decoding. > > > > > > > > > > Yeah, makes sense. So, we will just send origin_id (with first > > > streaming start message) and leave others. > > > > So IIUC, currently we are sending the latest origin_id which is set > > during the commit time. So in our case, while we start streaming we > > will send the origin_id of the latest change in the current stream > > right? > > > > It has to be sent only once with the first start message not with > consecutive start messages.
Okay, so do you mean to say that with the first start message we send the origin_id of the latest change? because during the transaction lifetime, the origin id can be changed. Currently, we send the origin_id of the latest WAL i.e. origin id of the commit. so I think it will be on a similar line if with every stream_start we send the origin_id of the latest change in that stream. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com