| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | yxq(at)o2(dot)pl, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #14785: Logical replication does not work after adding a column. Bug? |
| Date: | 2017-09-18 14:23:47 |
| Message-ID: | 03e54401-2ea1-fa0c-3eec-54b6b930e225@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 9/13/17 09:46, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 8/23/17 17:39, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I think we could actually kind of solve this by just ignoring pg_temp*
>> tables in the output plugin. Given we don't do DDL replication at this
>> point, that seems good enough. "all" we need is a way to make sure we're
>> not confusing the pg_temp* tables with a table the user has declared as
>> pg_temp - but we could check subscription state for that?
>
> How about this patch? There is some heuristic element in there, but it
> seems better than failing as we currently do.
Thoughts on this patch? Might be good to include in PG10.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | fte | 2017-09-19 09:14:02 | BUG #14819: postgres_fwd could not load library |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-18 13:55:54 | Re: BUG #14818: PLPGSQL: write access to a field of an array of records (well defined) |