Thanks Laurenz, Regards, Vijay On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 2:07 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2019-08-28 at 21:44 +0530, Vijaykumar Jain wrote: > > If I change wal_level back to replica, will it corrupt wal? coz it > > will then be having diff information ( r format of data ?) > > That's why you have to restart the server when you change that > parameter. This way, there will be a checkpoint marking the change. > > > What is the base reason as to why ddls are not sent via logical > > replication but the hot standby has ddl changes reflected absolutely > > fine ? > > Physical streaming replication just replicates the database files, > so it also replicates DDL statements, which are just changes to the > catalog tables. > > Basically, anything that can be recovered can be replicated. > > Logical replication has to perform "logical decoding", that is, > it has to translate the (physical) WAL information into logical > information (waht row was modified in which table). > > So this is much more complicated. It should be possible in theory, > but nobody has got around to solving the difficulties involved yet. > > > and there is one large limitation on large object support for logical > > replication? > > Where can I see the limitation on size or is it just certain data > > types ? > > This has nothing to do with the size; I guess the answer is the same as > above. One proble that I can see immediately is that primary and > standby don't share the same OIDs, yet every large object is identified > by its OID. So I think this is a fundamental problem that cannot be > solved. > > Yours, > Laurenz Albe > -- > Cybertec | https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com >
