On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 11:39 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 1:20 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I spent some time on the v57 patch and it looks good to me - tests are
> > passing, no complaints from pgindent and pgperltidy. I turned the CF
> > entry https://commitfest.postgresql.org/45/4273/ to RfC.
> >
>
> Thanks, the patch looks mostly good to me but I am not convinced of
> keeping the tests across versions in this form. I don't think they are
> tested in BF, only one can manually create a setup to test. Shall we
> remove it for now and then consider it separately?
I think we can retain the test_upgrade_from_pre_PG17 because it is not
only possible to trigger it manually but also one can write a CI
workflow to trigger it.
> Apart from that, I have made minor modifications in the docs to adjust
> the order of various prerequisites.
+ <para>
+ <application>pg_upgrade</application> attempts to migrate logical
+ replication slots. This helps avoid the need for manually defining the
+ same replication slots on the new publisher. Migration of logical
+ replication slots is only supported when the old cluster is version 17.0
+ or later. Logical replication slots on clusters before version 17.0 will
+ silently be ignored.
+ </para>
+ The new cluster must not have permanent logical replication slots, i.e.,
How about using "logical slots" in place of "logical replication
slots" to be more generic? We agreed and changed the function name to
--
Bharath Rupireddy
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com