| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: logical changeset generation v6.2 |
| Date: | 2013-10-15 14:25:04 |
| Message-ID: | 20131015142504.GA14406@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-10-15 10:20:55 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > For multi-master / conflict resolution you may also want all old
> > values to make sure that they have not changed on target.
>
> The patch as proposed doesn't make that information available. If you
> want that to be an option, now would be the right time to argue for
> it.
I don't think you necessarily want it for most MM solutions, but I agree
it will be useful for some scenarios.
I think the ReorderBufferChange struct needs a better way to distinguish
between old-key and old-tuple now, but I'd rather implement the
facililty for logging the full old tuple in a separate patch. The
patchset is big enough as is, lets not tack on more features.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-10-15 14:27:30 | Re: logical changeset generation v6.2 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-10-15 14:20:55 | Re: logical changeset generation v6.2 |