Logical slots not mentioned in CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT for replication protocol docs

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

As written in subject, replication protocol documentation lacks
details about logical slots in CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT command:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/protocol-replication.html
Attached is a patch correcting that.

An additional thing I noticed: START_REPLICATION does not mention that
it is possible to specify options for the output plugin. All the fixes
are included in the patch attached.
Regards,
--
Michael

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

As written in subject, replication protocol documentation lacks
details about logical slots in CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT command:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/protocol-replication.html
Attached is a patch correcting that.

An additional thing I noticed: START_REPLICATION does not mention that
it is possible to specify options for the output plugin. All the fixes
are included in the patch attached.

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 [, ...] )

?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

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

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.
--
Michael

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.

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.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

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

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