On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 3:19 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 3:12 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Why? I think it would just need similar restrictions as we are
> > > > planning for Delete operation such that filter columns must be either
> > > > present in primary or replica identity columns.
> > > >
> > >
> > > How else would you turn UPDATE to INSERT? For UPDATE we only send the
> > > identity columns and modified columns, and the decision happens on the
> > > subscriber.
> > >
> >
> > Hmm, we log the entire new tuple and replica identity columns for the
> > old tuple in WAL for Update. And, we are going to use a new tuple for
> > Insert, so we have everything we need.
> >
>
> But for making that decision we need to apply the filter on the old
> rows as well right. So if we want to apply the filter on the old rows
> then either the filter should only be on the replica identity key or
> we need to use REPLICA IDENTITY FULL. I think that is what Tomas
> wants to point out.
>
I have already mentioned that for Updates the filter needs criteria
similar to Deletes. This is exactly the requirement for Delete as
well.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.