Re: adding partitioned tables to publications

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)pghackers(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: adding partitioned tables to publications
Date: 2020-03-19 08:05:32
Message-ID: de683090-6dcd-7f8e-3bcc-955c427c60ca@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-03-18 15:19, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 8:16 PM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 2020-03-18 04:06, Amit Langote wrote:
>>> + if (isnull || !remote_is_publishable)
>>> + ereport(ERROR,
>>> + (errmsg("table \"%s.%s\" on the publisher is not publishable",
>>> + nspname, relname)));
>>>
>>> Maybe add a one-line comment above this to say it's an "not supposed
>>> to happen" error or am I missing something? Wouldn't elog() suffice
>>> for this?
>>
>> On second thought, maybe we should just drop this check. The list of
>> tables that is part of the publication was already filtered by the
>> publisher, so this query doesn't need to check it again. We just need
>> the relkind to be able to construct the COPY command, but we don't need
>> to second-guess it beyond that.
>
> Agreed.

Committed with that change then.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message asaba.takanori@fujitsu.com 2020-03-19 08:10:58 RE: ssl passphrase callback
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2020-03-19 07:55:30 Re: PATCH: Add uri percent-encoding for binary data