Re: Logical Replication of sequences - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 10:53 AM shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2)
> postgres=# create publication pub1 for all sequences WITH(publish='insert');
> ERROR:  publication parameters are not supported for publications
> defined as FOR ALL SEQUENCES
>
> postgres=# alter publication pub1 add table tab1;
> ERROR:  Tables or sequences cannot be added to or dropped from
> publication defined FOR ALL TABLES, ALL SEQUENCES, or both
>
> a) First msg has 'as', while second does not. Shall we make both the
> same? I think we can get rid of 'as'.
> b) Shouldn't the error msg start with lower case (second one)?
>

The (b) is related to following change:

+  if (tables && (pubform->puballtables || pubform->puballsequences))
    ereport(ERROR,
-        (errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
-         errmsg("publication \"%s\" is defined as FOR ALL TABLES",
-            NameStr(pubform->pubname)),
-         errdetail("Tables cannot be added to or dropped from FOR ALL
TABLES publications.")));
+        errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
+        errmsg("Tables or sequences cannot be added to or dropped
from publication defined FOR ALL TABLES, ALL SEQUENCES, or both"));
}

I see a bigger problem where we made errdetail as errmsg. Here, we are
trying to combine the message FOR ALL TABLES and FOR ALL SEQUENCES
which caused this change/confusion. It is better to keep them separate
to avoid confusion. The similar problem exists for following message:
- if (schemaidlist && pubform->puballtables)
+ if (schemaidlist && (pubform->puballtables || pubform->puballsequences))
  ereport(ERROR,
- (errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
- errmsg("publication \"%s\" is defined as FOR ALL TABLES",
- NameStr(pubform->pubname)),
- errdetail("Schemas cannot be added to or dropped from FOR ALL TABLES
publications.")));
+ errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
+ errmsg("Schemas cannot be added to or dropped from publication
defined FOR ALL TABLES, ALL SEQUENCES, or both"));

If we fix both of these then we don't need to do anything for point (a).

Few other comments:
=================
1. Is there a reason not to change just the footers part in
describeOneTableDetails()?
2. I think we can move create_publication.sgml and
pg_publication_sequences related changes to 0001 from doc patch.
3. Atop is_publishable_class(), we mention it has all the checks as
check_publication_add_relation but the sequence check is different. Is
it because check_publication_add_relation() is not called FOR ALL
SEQUENCES? If so, I have modified a few comments in the attached
related to that.
4.
@@ -878,13 +885,35 @@ CreatePublication(ParseState *pstate,
CreatePublicationStmt *stmt)
    &publish_via_partition_root_given,
    &publish_via_partition_root,
    &publish_generated_columns_given,
-   &publish_generated_columns);
+   &publish_generated_columns,
+   def_pub_action);
+
+ if (stmt->for_all_sequences &&
+ (publish_given || publish_via_partition_root_given ||
+ publish_generated_columns_given))
+ {
+ /*
+ * WITH clause parameters are not applicable when creating a FOR ALL
+ * SEQUENCES publication. If the publication includes tables as well,
+ * issue a notice.
+ */
+ if (!stmt->for_all_tables)
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
+ errmsg("publication parameters are not supported for publications
defined as FOR ALL SEQUENCES"));
+
+ ereport(NOTICE,
+ errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
+ errmsg("publication parameters are not applicable to sequence
synchronization and will be ignored"));
+ }

This change looks a bit ad hoc to me. I think it would be better to
handle this inside parse_publication_options(). The function can take
the third parameter as for_all_sequences and then use that to give
error when any options are present.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.