On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 9:59 AM Wim Bertels <wim.bertels@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> period of time, especially if the publisher is continuing to write. I
> would question the design of this that is allowing the subscribers to
> be offline. You may want to rethink this design a bit.
That is another aspect, to achieve a goal there generally more options,
but not my question.
In this case: a small dataset with little changes over time is used,
(so the overhead in storage should be little) ;
as this seems an easy introduction exercise to replication for the
students who are not always online. So they see what happens, always
more appealing that just talking about it.
Just to be clear, not this case: a setup for a company
>
--
mvg,
Wim
--
Kindness is a language which the deaf can hear and the blind can read.
-- Mark Twain
It doesn't matter how small the dataset change is. The same WAL stream is used for both logical and physical replication so it has to keep all WAL files until all subscribers for that publication have confirmed they have received them. If even a single subscriber goes offline, all WAL will be kept until that subscriber reconnects.
