[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postgresql-general
Subject:    Re: [HACKERS] Re: Logical slots not mentioned in CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT for replication protocol do
From:       Michael Paquier <michael.paquier () gmail ! com>
Date:       2014-05-31 15:34:34
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQxn-7Kidj+s7Cx02o88sYq4NJ3Y25x8VqAHRpqZGuKGw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 2014-05-30 08:12:35 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:31 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Thanks, this looks good.  But shouldn't the bit about output plugin
>> > options mention say something like:
>> >
>> > ( option_name option_argument [, ...] )
>> >
>> > ...instead of just:
>> >
>> > ( option [, ...] )
>> > ?
>> Yes, true. Here is an updated patch.
>
> I've pushed the patch with some additional changes. Hope they make sense
> to you.
Thanks, those changes look good. Limiting the uses of literal and
noticing that plugin options can have empty values are good catches
that I didn't get in my patch.

> I wonder whether START_REPLICATION ... LOGICAL should be folded into
> ... PHYSICAL since they have most things in common. But it'd be a
> awfully complicated description.
Yeah let's keep them separated, grouping them may be painful. Btw, I
think that we should explicitly list the types of messages that a
logical receiver can receive and use, aka:
- 'w' for stream data
- 'k' for keepalive messages
- 'r' for feedback
The logical messages have the same format as in the physical
replication case, the only difference being that the message 'h'
cannot be used. Thoughts?
Regards,
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]