| From: | Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: More tests with USING INDEX replident and dropped indexes |
| Date: | 2020-06-02 07:46:55 |
| Message-ID: | CA+fd4k6E5FQURHVW0VJ7mFiwRE1w5XoowSUHubL2WVtJoGaAYA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 12:50, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> While working on some other logical decoding patch recently, I bumped
> into the fact that we have special handling for the case of REPLICA
> IDENTITY USING INDEX when the dependent index is dropped, where the
> code handles that case as an equivalent of NOTHING.
>
> Attached is a patch to add more coverage for that. Any thoughts?
How about avoiding such an inconsistent situation? In that case,
replica identity works as NOTHING, but pg_class.relreplident is still
‘i’, confusing users. It seems to me that dropping an index specified
by REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX is not a valid operation.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-06-02 08:22:26 | Re: Resetting spilled txn statistics in pg_stat_replication |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2020-06-02 07:15:18 | elog(DEBUG2 in SpinLocked section. |