Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Masahiko Sawada |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
Date | |
Msg-id | CAD21AoAptjsBWVm1QM3uwAv7h4P1EiDSJ1-j_xnMqCaPYXPhwA@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 12:38 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:46 AM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 10:13:06AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:21 AM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 06:55:45PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 3:26 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 08:20:08AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > > > How about a comment like: "It has to be kept at 8-byte alignment > > > > > > > boundary so as to be accessed directly via C struct as it uses > > > > > > > TYPALIGN_DOUBLE for storage which has 4-byte alignment on platforms > > > > > > > like AIX."? Can you please suggest a better comment if you don't like > > > > > > > this one? > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd write it like this, though I'm not sure it's an improvement on your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > When ALIGNOF_DOUBLE==4 (e.g. AIX), the C ABI may impose 8-byte alignment on > > > > > > some of the C types that correspond to TYPALIGN_DOUBLE SQL types. To ensure > > > > > > catalog C struct layout matches catalog tuple layout, arrange for the tuple > > > > > > offset of each fixed-width, attalign='d' catalog column to be divisible by 8 > > > > > > unconditionally. Keep such columns before the first NameData column of the > > > > > > catalog, since packagers can override NAMEDATALEN to an odd number. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The best place for such a comment would be in one of > > > > > > src/test/regress/sql/*sanity*.sql, next to a test written to detect new > > > > > > violations. > > > > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > > > > > > > IIUC in the new test, we would need a new SQL function to calculate > > > > > the offset of catalog columns including padding, is that right? Or do > > > > > you have an idea to do that by using existing functionality? > > > > > > > > Something like this: > > > > > > > > select > > > > attrelid::regclass, > > > > attname, > > > > array(select typname > > > > from pg_type t join pg_attribute pa on t.oid = pa.atttypid > > > > where pa.attrelid = a.attrelid and pa.attnum > 0 and pa.attnum < a.attnum order by pa.attnum) AS types_before, > > > > (select sum(attlen) > > > > from pg_type t join pg_attribute pa on t.oid = pa.atttypid > > > > where pa.attrelid = a.attrelid and pa.attnum > 0 and pa.attnum < a.attnum) AS len_before > > > > from pg_attribute a > > > > join pg_class c on c.oid = attrelid > > > > where attalign = 'd' and relkind = 'r' and attnotnull and attlen <> -1 > > > > order by attrelid::regclass::text, attnum; > > > > attrelid │ attname │ types_before │ len_before > > > > ─────────────────┼──────────────┼─────────────────────────────────────────────┼──────────── > > > > pg_sequence │ seqstart │ {oid,oid} │ 8 > > > > pg_sequence │ seqincrement │ {oid,oid,int8} │ 16 > > > > pg_sequence │ seqmax │ {oid,oid,int8,int8} │ 24 > > > > pg_sequence │ seqmin │ {oid,oid,int8,int8,int8} │ 32 > > > > pg_sequence │ seqcache │ {oid,oid,int8,int8,int8,int8} │ 40 > > > > pg_subscription │ subskiplsn │ {oid,oid,name,oid,bool,bool,bool,char,bool} │ 81 > > > > (6 rows) > > > > > > > > That doesn't count padding, but hazardous column changes will cause a diff in > > > > the output. > > > > > > Yes, in this case, we can detect the violated column order even > > > without considering padding. On the other hand, I think this > > > calculation could not detect some patterns of order. For instance, > > > suppose the column order is {oid, bool, bool, oid, bool, bool, oid, > > > int8}, the len_before is 16 but offset of int8 column including > > > padding is 20 on ALIGNOF_DOUBLE==4 environment. > > > > Correct. Feel free to make it more precise. If you do want to add a > > function, it could be a regress.c function rather than an always-installed > > part of PostgreSQL. Again, getting the buildfarm green is a priority; we can > > always add tests later. > > Agreed. I'll update and submit the patch as soon as possible. > I've attached an updated patch. The patch includes a regression test to detect the new violation as we discussed. I've confirmed that Cirrus CI tests pass. Please confirm on AIX and review the patch. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
Attachment
pgsql-hackers by date: