On 14.11.24 18:25, Paul Jungwirth wrote:
> On 11/13/24 02:11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I have committed the documentation patches
>>
>> v43-0001-Add-WITHOUT-OVERLAPS-and-PERIOD-to-ALTER-TABLE-r.patch
>> v43-0002-Update-conexclop-docs-for-WITHOUT-OVERLAPS.patch
>
> Thanks!
>
>> For the logical replication fixes
>>
>> v43-0003-Fix-logical-replication-for-temporal-tables.patch
>>
>> can you summarize what the issues currently are? Is it currently
>> broken, or just not working as well as it could?
>>
>> AFAICT, there might be two separate issues. One is that you can't use
>> a temporal index as replica identity, because ALTER TABLE rejects it.
>> The other is that a subscriber fails to make use of a replica identity
>> index, because it uses the wrong strategy numbers.
>
> Correct, there are two issues this commit fixes:
>
> On the publisher side: You can use REPLICA IDENTITY DEFAULT with a
> temporal PK/UNIQUE index. There is no validation step, and sending the
> changes works fine. But REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX fails because the
> validation step rejects the non-btree index.
Ok, I have committed the fix for this, and I'll continue working through
the rest of the patches.
> Then on the subscriber side, we are not applying changes correctly,
> because we assume the strategy numbers are btree numbers.
