| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dump-restore loosing 'attnotnull' bit for DEFERRABLE PRIMARY KEY column(s). |
| Date: | 2024-05-14 14:08:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYu8qR61teGWz5Yq0hhcebnu1zPF0qHaOAVCu4dV+KGDA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 12:32 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> On 2024-Mar-07, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Maybe we can add a flag RelationData->rd_ispkdeferred, so that
> > RelationGetPrimaryKeyIndex returned InvalidOid for deferrable PKs; then
> > logical replication would continue to not know about this PK, which
> > perhaps is what we want. I'll do some testing with this.
>
> This seems to work okay.
There is a CommitFest entry for this patch. Should that entry be
closed in view of the not-NULL revert
(6f8bb7c1e9610dd7af20cdaf74c4ff6e6d678d44)?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-05-14 14:16:00 | Re: Network failure may prevent promotion |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2024-05-14 14:01:21 | Re: explain format json, unit for serialize and memory are different. |