Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

Hi Amit,

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 at 08:06, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> Thanks for sharing this case. I hadn't considered it, but you're
> right that it should be handled sensibly. I have fixed table sync
> code to handle this case properly. Could you please check your case
> with the attached updated patch?
>
> I was checking this today and found that the behavior doesn't change much
with the updated patch. The tables are still replicated, just that a select
count from parent table shows 0, rest of the partitions including default
one has the data from the publisher. I was expecting more like an error at
subscriber saying the table type is not same.

Please find the attached file for the test case, in case something is
unclear.

--
Regards,
Rafia Sabih