From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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: | 2020-04-08 09:26:30 |
Message-ID: | f4a265b3-e1e4-4367-c7db-57fac0a26545@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-04-08 07:45, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 1:22 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 6:01 PM Peter Eisentraut
>> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> The descriptions of the new fields in RelationSyncEntry don't seem to
>>> match the code accurately, or at least it's confusing.
>>> replicate_as_relid is always filled in with an ancestor, even if
>>> pubviaroot is not set.
>>
>> Given this confusion, I have changed how replicate_as_relid works so
>> that it's now always set -- if different from the relation's own OID,
>> the code for "publishing via root" kicks in in various places.
>>
>>> I think the pubviaroot field is actually not necessary. We only need
>>> replicate_as_relid.
>>
>> Looking through the code, I agree. I guess I only kept it around to
>> go with pubupdate, etc.
>
> Think I broke truncate replication with this. Fixed in the attached
> updated patch.
All committed.
Thank you and everyone very much for working on this. I'm very happy
that these two features from PG10 have finally met. :)
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2020-04-08 09:28:32 | Re: [PATCH] RUM Postgres 13 patch |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-04-08 09:25:13 | Re: recovery_target_action=pause with confusing hint |