| From: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER SUBSCRIPTION REFRESH PUBLICATION has default copy_data = true? |
| Date: | 2021-06-07 01:05:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAHut+Pv=zY_hmUsehMdFJmgZpGKRmazOEJHMm7T8d2Pf4Lv=LQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 12:52 AM Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > Is that a deliberate functionality, or is it a quirk / bug?
>
> copy_data is an option of the action, not a property of the
> subscription. The difference between those two things is admittedly not
> clearly (at all?) documented.
>
> However, I'm not sure whether creating a subscription that always
> defaults to copy_data=false for tables added in the future is useful
> functionality, so I think the current behavior is okay.
...
On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 12:53 AM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Is that a deliberate functionality, or is it a quirk / bug?
>
> I don't think it's a bug....
...
OK. Thanks to both of you for sharing your thoughts about it.
------
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith
Fujitsu Australia
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-06-07 02:13:48 | Re: please update ps display for recovery checkpoint |
| Previous Message | ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com | 2021-06-07 00:57:45 | Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |