| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Logical replication and inheritance |
| Date: | 2017-04-14 01:57:10 |
| Message-ID: | 15eac9b6-95ca-e407-0ee6-98f69895b798@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I don't think inheritance and partitioning should behave the same in
terms of logical replication.
For me the current behavior with inherited tables is correct.
What I would like partitioned tables support to look like is that if we
add partitioned table, the data decoded from any of the partitions would
be sent as if the change was for that partitioned table so that the
partitioning scheme on subscriber does not need to be same as on
publisher. That's nontrivial to do though probably.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-04-14 02:42:52 | Re: Letting the client choose the protocol to use during a SASL exchange |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-04-14 01:55:19 | Re: SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade |