Hi,
> > Outside the scope of special TimescaleDB tables and the speculated
> > pg_partman old-style table migration, will this proposed new feature
> > have any other application? In other words, do you know if this
> > proposal will be of any benefit to the *normal* users who just have
> > native PostgreSQL inherited tables they want to replicate?
>
> I think it comes down to why an inheritance scheme was used. If it's
> because you want to group rows into named, queryable subsets (e.g. the
> "cities/capitals" example in the docs [1]), I don't think this has any
> utility, because I assume you'd want to replicate your subsets as-is.
>
> But if it's because you've implemented a partitioning scheme of your
> own (the docs still list reasons you might want to [2], even today),
> and all you ever really do is interact with the root table, I think
> this feature will give you some of the same benefits that
> publish_via_partition_root gives native partition users. We're very
> much in that boat, but I don't know how many others are.
I would like to point out that inheritance is merely a tool for
modeling data. Its use cases are not limited to only partitioning,
although many people ended up using it for this purpose back when we
didn't have a proper built-in partitioning. So unless we are going to
remove inheritance in nearest releases (*) I believe it should work
with logical replication in a sane and convenient way.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I got an impression that the patch tries
to accomplish just that.
(*) Which personally I believe would be a good change. Unlikely to
happen, though.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
