On 9/13/17 09:46, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 8/23/17 17:39, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I think we could actually kind of solve this by just ignoring pg_temp*
>> tables in the output plugin. Given we don't do DDL replication at this
>> point, that seems good enough. "all" we need is a way to make sure we're
>> not confusing the pg_temp* tables with a table the user has declared as
>> pg_temp - but we could check subscription state for that?
>
> How about this patch? There is some heuristic element in there, but it
> seems better than failing as we currently do.
Thoughts on this patch? Might be good to include in PG10.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
