On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 8/31/17 08:19, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> I think that, in the end, covered all the comments? > >> I didn't see any explanation of what this would actually be useful for. >> I suppose you could skip over some changes you don't want replicated, >> but how do you find to what position to skip? > > Um ... I can see how you might expect to skip some events in a logical > replication stream and have a chance of things not being utterly broken. > But how can that work for physical replication? Missed updates are > normally spelled "unrecoverable data corruption" at that level.
One use-case possible, even if it is easy to counter it by dropping and recreating a slot, is to give up with what has been retained and allow another client to reuse the same slot for a new standby. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
