| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Useless "Replica Identity: NOTHING" noise from psql \d |
| Date: | 2014-03-26 15:12:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20140326151258.GB23012@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:07:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > In the "INDEX" case, should the output mention specifically which index
> > is being considered?
>
> Ah, good idea. Updated patch attached. The output is now:
>
> test=> \d+ test
> Table "public.test"
> Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
> --------+---------+-----------+---------+--------------+-------------
> x | integer | not null | plain | |
> Indexes:
> "test_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (x) REPLICA IDENTITY
> "i_test2" btree (x)
> --> Replica Identity: USING INDEX "test_pkey"
> Has OIDs: no
>
> However, now that I look at it, it seems redundant as REPLICA IDENTITY
> is already marked on the actual index. Ideas?
Hearing nothing, I have gone back to the previous patch that just marks
replica identity as USING INDEX; applied patch attached.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| repica.diff | text/x-diff | 10.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thom Brown | 2014-03-26 15:18:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Duplicated row after promote in synchronous streaming replication |
| Previous Message | Dang Minh Huong | 2014-03-26 15:08:11 | Duplicated row after promote in synchronous streaming replication |