From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci(at)gmail(dot)com>, japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
Date: | 2021-12-01 21:54:16 |
Message-ID: | CAHut+PuGgeme_XLQ3FGg8foN=+XYHvU8tVZJ=PrjoMJ07x-hhw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 9:34 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
...
> Thanks for the updated patch, few comments:
> 1) Should this be changed to include non IMMUTABLE system functions
> are not allowed:
> + not-null constraints in the <literal>WHERE</literal> clause. The
> + <literal>WHERE</literal> clause does not allow functions or user-defined
> + operators.
> + </para>
>
Updated docs in v44 [1]
> 2) We can remove the #if 0 code if we don't plan to keep it in the final patch.
> --- a/src/backend/parser/parse_agg.c
> +++ b/src/backend/parser/parse_agg.c
> @@ -552,11 +552,12 @@ check_agglevels_and_constraints(ParseState
> *pstate, Node *expr)
>
> break;
> case EXPR_KIND_PUBLICATION_WHERE:
> +#if 0
> if (isAgg)
> err = _("aggregate functions are not
> allowed in publication WHERE expressions");
> else
> err = _("grouping operations are not
> allowed in publication WHERE expressions");
> -
> +#endif
>
Fixed in v44 [1]
> 4) Should this be changed, since we error out if publisher without
> replica identify performs delete or update:
> + The <literal>WHERE</literal> clause must contain only columns that are
> + covered by <literal>REPLICA IDENTITY</literal>, or are part of the primary
> + key (when <literal>REPLICA IDENTITY</literal> is not set), otherwise
> + <command>DELETE</command> or <command>UPDATE</command> operations will not
> + be replicated. That's because old row is used and it only contains primary
> + key or columns that are part of the <literal>REPLICA IDENTITY</literal>; the
> + remaining columns are <literal>NULL</literal>. For <command>INSERT</command>
>
> to:
> + The <literal>WHERE</literal> clause must contain only columns that are
> + covered by <literal>REPLICA IDENTITY</literal>, or are part of the primary
> + key (when <literal>REPLICA IDENTITY</literal> is not set), otherwise
> + <command>DELETE</command> or <command>UPDATE</command> operations will be
> + disallowed on those tables. That's because old row is used and it
> only contains primary
> + key or columns that are part of the <literal>REPLICA IDENTITY</literal>; the
> + remaining columns are <literal>NULL</literal>. For <command>INSERT</command>
>
Updated docs in v44 [1]
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-12-01 21:59:24 | Re: Fix inappropriate uses of PG_GETARG_UINT32() |
Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2021-12-01 21:50:26 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |