On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 05:09:40PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: >> > > I would not in any way refer to logical decoding as being only a proof >> > > of concept, even before logical replication. >> > >> > The community ships a reliable logical _encoding_, and a test logical >> > _decoding_. >> >> Yes, so what? What you said is "I didn't think logical decoding was >> really more than a proof-of-concept until now", which is plainly wrong, >> given I know a significant number of users using it in production. Some >> of them are well known & large enterprises, and it's used to enable >> critical things. > > I am getting tired of saying this. When I am writing the release notes, > I am trying to figure out how it affects our shipped code, and the only > "decoding" I know of is test_decoding.
If you run 'git show --stat b89e151054a05f0f6d356ca52e3b725dd0505e53', you will see that it includes a test_decoding module (which is a sample logical decoding output plugin) and a tremendous pile of changes to src/backend/replication/logical (which is the core logical decoding infrastructure). The latter is a larger volume of changes than the former. It would perhaps be fair to describe test_decoding as a proof-of-concept, but it is not fair or correct to describe the core infrastructure that way. Anyway, they're separate things. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
