On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Peter Geoghegan p...@heroku.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have:
* pg_receivexlog
* pg_recvlogical
binaries, even from the same source directory. Why once
On 2014-04-24 09:39:21 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I can't find that this discussion actually came to a proper consensus, but
I may be missing something. Did we go with pg_recvlogical just because we
couldn't decide on a better name, or did we intentionally decide it was the
best?
I went
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
On 2014-04-24 09:39:21 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I can't find that this discussion actually came to a proper consensus,
but
I may be missing something. Did we go with pg_recvlogical just because we
couldn't
On 2014-04-24 09:46:07 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.comwrote:
On 2014-04-24 09:39:21 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I can't find that this discussion actually came to a proper consensus,
but
I may be missing something.
On 09/27/2013 05:18 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi Steve,
On 2013-09-27 17:06:59 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
I've determined that when in this test the walsender seems to be hitting
this when it is decode the transactions that are behind the slonik
commands to add tables to replication (set add
On 09/26/2013 02:47 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
I've determined that when in this test the walsender seems to be
hitting this when it is decode the transactions that are behind the
slonik commands to add tables to replication (set add table, set add
sequence). This is before the SUBSCRIBE SET
Hi Steve,
On 2013-09-27 17:06:59 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
I've determined that when in this test the walsender seems to be hitting
this when it is decode the transactions that are behind the slonik
commands to add tables to replication (set add table, set add sequence).
This is before the
On 09/25/2013 01:20 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
On 09/25/2013 11:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-09-25 11:01:44 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
This patch set now fails to apply because of the commit Rename
various
freeze multixact variables.
And I am
On 09/17/2013 10:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
This patch set now fails to apply because of the commit Rename various
freeze multixact variables.
And I am even partially guilty for that patch...
Rebased patches attached.
While testing the logical replication changes against my WIP logical
On 2013-09-25 11:01:44 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
This patch set now fails to apply because of the commit Rename various
freeze multixact variables.
And I am even partially guilty for that patch...
Rebased patches attached.
While testing the
On 09/25/2013 11:08 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-09-25 11:01:44 -0400, Steve Singer wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
This patch set now fails to apply because of the commit Rename various
freeze multixact variables.
And I am even partially guilty for that patch...
On 2013-09-23 23:12:53 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
What exactly is the purpose of this tool? My impression is that the
output of logical replication is a series of function calls to a
logical replication plugin, but does that plugin necessarily have to
produce an output format that gets
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:15 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
There needs to be a client acking the reception of the data in some
form. There's currently two output methods, SQL and walstreamer, but
there easily could be further, it's basically two functions you have
write.
On 2013-09-24 11:04:06 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
- Requiring a client is a short-sighted design. There's no reason we
shouldn't *support* having a client, but IMHO it shouldn't be the only
way to use the feature.
There really aren't many limitations preventing you from doing anything
else.
On 09/24/2013 11:21 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Not having a consumer of the walsender interface included sounds like a
bad idea to me, even if it were only useful for testing. Now, you could
argue it should be in /contrib - and I wouldn't argue against that
except it shares code with the rest of
On 2013-09-20 14:15:23 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I have a little bit of feedback that I forgot to mention in my earlier
reviews, because I thought it was too trivial then: something about
the name pg_receivellog annoys me in a way that the name
pg_receivexlog does not. Specifically, it
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
pg_receivelogical? Protest now or forever hold your peace.
I was thinking pg_receiveloglog, but that works just as well.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
On 2013-09-23 13:47:05 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund escribió:
On 2013-09-20 14:15:23 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I have a little bit of feedback that I forgot to mention in my earlier
reviews, because I thought it was too trivial then: something about
the name
Andres Freund escribió:
On 2013-09-20 14:15:23 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I have a little bit of feedback that I forgot to mention in my earlier
reviews, because I thought it was too trivial then: something about
the name pg_receivellog annoys me in a way that the name
pg_receivexlog
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have:
* pg_receivexlog
* pg_recvlogical
binaries, even from the same source directory. Why once pg_recv and
once pg_receive?
+1
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund escribió:
On 2013-09-23 13:47:05 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I had proposed pg_recvlogical
I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have:
* pg_receivexlog
* pg_recvlogical
binaries, even from the same source directory. Why once pg_recv and
once pg_receive?
Well. What are
On 9/23/13 12:54 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have:
* pg_receivexlog
* pg_recvlogical
binaries, even from the same source directory. Why once pg_recv and
once pg_receive?
It's consistent because they are the same length!
(Obviously, this would severely
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Andres Freund escribió:
On 2013-09-23 13:47:05 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I had proposed pg_recvlogical
I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have:
* pg_receivexlog
* pg_recvlogical
binaries, even from the
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The existence of a tool like
pg_receivellog seems to presuppose that the goal is spit out logical
change records as text, but I'm not sure that's actually going to be a
very common thing to want to do...
Sure, but I
On 09/20/2013 06:33 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
The points I find daunting are the semantics, like:
* How do we control whether a standby is allowed prevent WAL file
removal. What if archiving is configured?
* How do we control whether a standby is allowed to peg xmin?
* How long do we
Hi,
On 2013-09-19 12:05:35 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
No question. I'm not saying that that optimization shouldn't go in
right after the main patch does, but IMHO right now there are too many
things going in the 0004 patch to discuss them all simultaneously.
I'd like to find a way of
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
More generally, the thing that bugs me about this approach is that
logical replication is not really special, but what you've done here
MAKES it special. There are plenty of other situations where we are
too
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Rebased patches attached.
I spent a bit of time looking at these patches yesterday and today.
It seems to me that there's a fair amount of stylistic cleanup that is
still needed, and some pretty bad naming choices, and
Hi Robert,
On 2013-09-19 10:02:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
Rebased patches attached.
I spent a bit of time looking at these patches yesterday and today.
It seems to me that there's a fair amount of stylistic
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
- Looking specifically at the 0004 patch, I think that the
RecentGlobalDataXmin changes are logically separate from the rest of
the patch, and that if we're going to commit them at all, it should be
separate from the
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 11:31 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2013-09-17 09:45:28 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 9/15/13 11:30 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-09-15 11:20:20 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 22:49 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
On 9/15/13 11:30 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-09-15 11:20:20 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 22:49 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
Attached you can find the newest version of the logical changeset
generation patchset.
You probably have bigger things to worry about, but
What's with 0001-Improve-regression-test-for-8410.patch? Did you mean
to include that?
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 2013-09-15 10:03:54 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
What's with 0001-Improve-regression-test-for-8410.patch? Did you mean
to include that?
Gah, no. That's already committed and unrelated. Stupid wildcard.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund
On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 22:49 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
Attached you can find the newest version of the logical changeset
generation patchset.
You probably have bigger things to worry about, but please check the
results of cpluspluscheck, because some of the header files don't
include header
On 2013-09-15 11:20:20 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 22:49 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
Attached you can find the newest version of the logical changeset
generation patchset.
You probably have bigger things to worry about, but please check the
results of
36 matches
Mail list logo
