Confusing with commit time usage in logical decoding
If you received this message twice, sorry for annoying since I did not
subscribe successfully previously due to conflicting email domain.
Dear postgresql general mailing list,
I am currently using the logical decoding feature (version 9.6 I think
as far as I found in the source, wal_level: logical,
max_replication_slot: > 1, track_commit_timestamp: on, I am not sure
whether this will help or not).
Following the online documentation, everything works fine until I input
SELECT * FROM pg_logical_slot_peek_changes('regression_slot', NULL,
NULL, 'include-timestamp', 'on');
I always got 1999-12-31 16:00 as the commit time for arbitrary
transactions with DML statements.
After several tries, I realize that the txn->commit_time returned was
always 0.
Could you help me by indicating me what could be wrong in my case? Any
missing parameters set?
Thank you in advance,
Kind Regards,
Weiping
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Hi,
On 2016-02-29 11:12:14 +0100, Weiping Qu wrote:
If you received this message twice, sorry for annoying since I did not
subscribe successfully previously due to conflicting email domain.Dear postgresql general mailing list,
I am currently using the logical decoding feature (version 9.6 I think as
far as I found in the source, wal_level: logical, max_replication_slot: > 1,
track_commit_timestamp: on, I am not sure whether this will help or not).
Following the online documentation, everything works fine until I inputSELECT * FROM pg_logical_slot_peek_changes('regression_slot', NULL, NULL,
'include-timestamp', 'on');I always got 1999-12-31 16:00 as the commit time for arbitrary transactions
with DML statements.
After several tries, I realize that the txn->commit_time returned was always
0.
Could you help me by indicating me what could be wrong in my case? Any
missing parameters set?
That was a bug introduced recently (9.5). The issue was discussed in
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/56D42918.1010108%40postgrespro.ru
, and a fix has now been pushed.
Thanks for the report!
Regards,
Andres
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general