On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 6:40 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 11:31 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> >
> > CREATE PUBLICATION pub1 FOR
> > TABLE t1,t2,t3, ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA s1,s2,
> > SEQUENCE seq1,seq2, ALL SEQUENCES IN SCHEMA s3,s4;
> >
> > Abstractly it'd be
> >
> > createpub := CREATE PUBLICATION pubname FOR cpitem [, ... ] [ WITH ... ]
> >
> > cpitem := ALL TABLES |
> > TABLE name |
> > ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA name |
> > ALL SEQUENCES |
> > SEQUENCE name |
> > ALL SEQUENCES IN SCHEMA name |
> > name
> >
> > The grammar output would need some post-analysis to attribute the
> > right type to bare "name" items, but that doesn't seem difficult.
>
> That last bare "name" cpitem. looks like it would permit the following syntax:
>
> CREATE PUBLICATION pub FOR a,b,c;
>
> Was that intentional?
>
I think so. IIUC, the idea is that after parsing we find out whether
the given name is table, sequence, or any other object. Here, I think
the name could be either of table or sequence because, for schema, we
won't be knowing whether to include tables, sequences, or both in the
schema. Also, we can have the same name for schema and table so it
might be tricky to distinguish among those unless we give priority to
one of those.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
