On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 5:42 PM Tomas Vondra
<tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/14/22 12:12, houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 5:08 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> Anyway, the fix does not address tablesync, as explained in [1]. I'm not
> sure what to do about it - in principle, we could calculate which
> relations to sync, and then eliminate "duplicates" (i.e. relations where
> we are going to sync an ancestor).
>
As mentioned in my previous email [1], this appears to be a base code
issue (even without row filter or column filter work), so it seems
better to deal with it separately. It has been reported separately as
well [2] where we found some similar issues.
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1LSb-xrvGEm3ShaRA%3DMkdii2d%2B4vqh9DGPvVDA%2BD9ibYw%40mail.gmail.com
[2] -
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS0PR01MB5716DC2982CC735FDE388804940B9@OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
