From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Added schema level support for publication. |
Date: | 2021-08-10 11:24:12 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JcXG3stqncfB6BjcXW+ao1vg=5q6YJsvjDoY=+AvT1Lw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 11:31 AM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:00 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > ---
> > Suppose that a parent table and its child table are defined in
> > different schemas, there is a publication for the schema where only
> > the parent table is defined, and the subscriber subscribes to the
> > publication, should changes for its child table be replicated to the
> > subscriber?
>
> I felt that in this case only the table data that is present in the
> publish schema should be sent to the subscriber. Since the child table
> schema is not part of the publication, I felt this child table data
> should not be replicated.
>
But, as point out by Sawada-San, the same is true for FOR TABLE case.
I think we should be consistent here and should publish the data for
the child table if the parent table's schema is published.
> I have kept the above same behavior in the case of publication created
> using PUBLISH_VIA_PARTITION_ROOT option i.e the child table data will
> not be sent. But now I'm feeling we should send the child table data
> since it is being sent through the parent table which is part of the
> publication. Also this way users can use this option if the user has
> the table having partitions designed across the schemas.
>
This sounds fine to me.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Drouvot, Bertrand | 2021-08-10 11:59:57 | Re: [bug] Logical Decoding of relation rewrite with toast does not reset toast_hash |
Previous Message | Ranier Vilela | 2021-08-10 11:21:36 | Re: Bug in huge simplehash |