Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 14/04/16 20:46, Robert Haas wrote: I believe logical replication is a fundamental database technology that should be considered just as much within the score of the core product as physical replication, parallel query, or UPSERT. Agreed, I believed we need this for very long time as well (pg

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Petr Jelinek
On 14/04/16 20:14, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: On 14 April 2016 at 00:48, Robert Haas wrote: I think this would be a good topic to discuss at PGCon. I'm not going to be able to be at PGCon, and I don't think Petr is either. That's unfortunate in t

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Craig Ringer
On 15 April 2016 at 02:14, Robert Haas wrote: > That's a bummer. I suppose you won't be at NYC either? > I won't. I'm not sure about Petr. It's over 24h travel, and costly, from Perth. So conference attendance is unfortunately something I have to pick and choose about. -- Craig Ringer

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > 1) "more deeply into core" > I'm open to doing that for some parts of the code, if there is benefit. At > present, an extension has exactly the same attributes as an in-core > solution, so I don't currently see any benefit in doing so. Could y

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 14 April 2016 at 00:48, Robert Haas wrote: >> I think this would be a good topic to discuss at PGCon. > > I'm not going to be able to be at PGCon, and I don't think Petr is either. > That's unfortunate in terms of planning for this. That'

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/14/2016 08:57 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On 14 April 2016 at 16:52, Andres Freund mailto:and...@anarazel.de>> wrote: > If we aren't going to talk about changes in advance, then multiple > commit rights is a recipe for conflict, not a better way at all. Obviously we should discuss

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/14/2016 08:52 AM, Andres Freund wrote: I think there's quite a bit of work needed all around. The output plugin's protocol needs some work, the whole catalog infrastructure and management in pglogical itself needs a lot of work. +1 and let's not forget a need for comprehensive documentat

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/14/2016 08:26 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On 13 April 2016 at 17:48, Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs mailto:si...@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote: > Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not? I ha

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2016-04-14 08:52:00 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > Petr is more than capable for managing bug fixes and I would like to see > > him have his chance to demonstrate his skill and get a shot at being a > > committer, just as you did. Having one person manage a feature seems like > > the best

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Simon Riggs
On 14 April 2016 at 16:52, Andres Freund wrote: > > If we aren't going to talk about changes in advance, then multiple > > commit rights is a recipe for conflict, not a better way at all. > > Obviously we should discuss design bits, I don't see how that's a > conflict. > If everything is going

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2016-04-14 16:42:10 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > What intense work is required? pglogical already works, it just requires > review. I've done a round of reviews in January, still not all points are addressed of yet (due to time limits afaik). At that pace it's unrealistic to get anything i

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Simon Riggs
On 14 April 2016 at 02:05, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2016-04-13 09:38:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > > If we want this in 9.7 > > I desperately want logical replication for 9.7. And I'm planning to put > in a good chunk of work to make that happen in some way. Good, thanks. I'm happy to

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Simon Riggs
On 13 April 2016 at 17:48, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs > wrote: > > Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not? > > I haven't spent very much time on it yet. I tend to prefer the idea > of integrating it more deeply into core a

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-14 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/13/2016 06:05 PM, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2016-04-13 09:38:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: If we want this in 9.7 I desperately want logical replication for 9.7. And I'm planning to put in a good chunk of work to make that happen in some way. I don't see a need for it to be in -core

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-13 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2016-04-13 09:38:39 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > If we want this in 9.7 I desperately want logical replication for 9.7. And I'm planning to put in a good chunk of work to make that happen in some way. > we'll need lots of people's support, design commentary and assistance > with bug fixin

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-13 Thread Craig Ringer
On 14 April 2016 at 00:48, Robert Haas wrote: > > I think this would be a good topic to discuss at PGCon. > > I'm not going to be able to be at PGCon, and I don't think Petr is either. That's unfortunate in terms of planning for this. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.c

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-13 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not? I haven't spent very much time on it yet. I tend to prefer the idea of integrating it more deeply into core and adding SQL syntax around it, but I'm not going to fight

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-13 Thread Abhijit Menon-Sen
At 2016-04-13 03:46:21 -0700, j...@commandprompt.com wrote: > > ALTER DATABASE ADD NODE; > ALTER SCHEMA SUBSCRIBE ALL; > CREATE REPLICATION SET; > > But I am unaware if that is possible within the constraints of the > extensions API. It is not possible. -- Abhijit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers ma

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-13 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On 04/13/2016 01:38 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: On 12 April 2016 at 23:46, Joshua D. Drake mailto:j...@commandprompt.com>> wrote: So what am I missing? Thanks for the bug report, but unfortunately the CF is now over and pglogical is not in 9.6. So its a little late for reviews and bug reports.

Re: [HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-13 Thread Simon Riggs
On 12 April 2016 at 23:46, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > So what am I missing? > Thanks for the bug report, but unfortunately the CF is now over and pglogical is not in 9.6. So its a little late for reviews and bug reports. I'm not sure of the exact status of pglogical now. It's has a good receptio

[HACKERS] Pglogical questions and problems

2016-04-12 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Hello, Alright -- here we go PostgreSQL 9.5.2, Ubuntu Trusty, All packages from apt.postgresql.org except PgLogical which is from 2Q: I have the following setup: Origin0->Replica0 Table: logical_test(id bigserial primary key) Origin0: SELECT pglogical.create_node( node_name := 'origin',