On 13.08.21 04:59, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> Even if we drop all tables added to the publication from it, 'pubkind'
>> doesn't go back to 'empty'. Is that intentional behavior? If we do
>> that, we can save the lookup of pg_publication_rel and
>> pg_publication_schema in some cases, and we can switch the publication
>> that was created as FOR SCHEMA to FOR TABLE and vice versa.
>>
> Do we really want to allow users to change a publication that is FOR
> SCHEMA to FOR TABLE? I see that we don't allow to do that FOR TABLES.
> postgres=# Alter Publication pub add table tbl1;
> ERROR: publication "pub" is defined as FOR ALL TABLES
> DETAIL: Tables cannot be added to or dropped from FOR ALL TABLES publications.
I think the strict separation between publication-for-tables vs.
publication-for-schemas is a mistake. Why can't I have a publication
that publishes tables t1, t2, t3, *and* schemas s1, s2, s3. Also note
that we have a pending patch to add sequences support to logical
replication. So eventually, a publication will be able to contain a
bunch of different objects of different kinds.
