On 05/05/17 02:46, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 05:09:40PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I would not in any way refer to logical decoding as being only a proof
>>>> of concept, even before logical replication.
>>>
>>> The community ships a reliable logical _encoding_, and a test logical
>>> _decoding_.
>>
>> Yes, so what? What you said is "I didn't think logical decoding was
>> really more than a proof-of-concept until now", which is plainly wrong,
>> given I know a significant number of users using it in production. Some
>> of them are well known & large enterprises, and it's used to enable
>> critical things.
>
> I am getting tired of saying this. When I am writing the release notes,
> I am trying to figure out how it affects our shipped code, and the only
> "decoding" I know of is test_decoding. My message was this:
I actually think the main misunderstanding here comes from the
test_decoding name interpretation. The test_decoding does not decode
anything and there are no external "decoders". The decoding happens in
core, the decoding just provides C API for plugins to consume the
decoded info (ie, heap tuples and similar). The test_decoding *tests*
the decoding API and the external projects use the decoding API as well
but they don't really decode anything, their role is of filtering and
deciding the wire protocol mostly.
-- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services