Re: deferred primary key and logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Euler Taveira
Subject Re: deferred primary key and logical replication
Date
Msg-id CAH503wD5ZAG1Ve5AqJ5bTERwCj=di4heT94qjJ9oGgem5f-_FA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: deferred primary key and logical replication  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: deferred primary key and logical replication  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 08:34, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:41 AM Euler Taveira
<euler.taveira@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While looking at an old wal2json issue, I stumbled on a scenario that a table
> with a deferred primary key is not updatable in logical replication. AFAICS it
> has been like that since the beginning of logical decoding and seems to be an
> oversight while designing logical decoding.
>

I am not sure if it is an oversight because we document that the index
must be non-deferrable, see "USING INDEX records the old values of the
columns covered by the named index, which must be unique, not partial,
not deferrable, and include only columns marked NOT NULL." in docs
[1].


Inspecting this patch again, I forgot to consider that RelationGetIndexList()
is called by other backend modules. Since logical decoding deals with finished
transactions, it is ok to use a deferrable primary key. However, this patch is
probably wrong because it does not consider the other modules.


--
Euler Taveira                 http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgstat_report_activity() and parallel CREATE INDEX (was: Parallel index creation & pg_stat_activity)
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: pgstat_report_activity() and parallel CREATE INDEX (was: Parallel index creation & pg_stat_activity)