> postgres[52656][1]=# SELECT 1; > ┌──────────┐ > │ ?column? │ > ├──────────┤ > │ 1 │ > └──────────┘ > (1 row) > > > I am very much not in love with the way that was implemented, but it's > there, and it's used as far as I know (cf tablesync.c).
Ouch ... so they made IDENT in the replication grammar be a trigger to enter the regular grammar. Crazy. No way to put those worms back in the tin now, I guess.
Is that documented ?
It is still my opinion that we should prohibit a logical replication connection from being used to do physical replication. Horiguchi-san, Sawada-san and Masao-san are all of the same opinion. Dave Cramer (of the JDBC team) is not opposed to the change -- he says they're just using it because they didn't realize they should be doing differently.
I think my exact words were
"I don't see this is a valid reason to keep doing something. If it is broken then fix it.
Clients can deal with the change."
in response to:
Well, I don't really think that we can just break a behavior that exists since 9.4 as you could break applications relying on the existing behavior, and that's also the point of Vladimir upthread.
Which is different than not being opposed to the change. I don't see this as broken,
and it's quite possible that some of our users are using it. It certainly needs to be documented
