Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and inheritance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and inheritance
Date
Msg-id bac36711-4694-723a-8651-7315d04d6c21@lab.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and inheritance  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication and inheritance  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2017/04/15 3:53, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 4/13/17 06:48, Amit Langote wrote:
>> That is an important consideration because of pg_dump.  See below:
>>
>> create table foo (a int);
>> create table bar () inherits (foo);
>> create publication mypub for table foo;  -- bar is added too.
>>
>> $ pg_dump -s | psql -e test
>> <snip>
>> ALTER PUBLICATION mypub ADD TABLE foo;
>> ERROR:  relation "bar" is already member of publication "mypub"
> 
> To fix this, pg_dump should emit ADD TABLE ONLY foo.

Yeah, that's one way.  Attached is a tiny patch for that.

By the way, I noticed that although grammar accepts ONLY and * against a
table name to affect whether descendant tables are included, the same is
not mentioned in the CREATE PUBLICATION and ALTER PUBLICATION reference
pages.  I suspect it was probably not intentional, so attached a doc patch
for that too.

Thanks,
Amit

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Logical replication launcher uses wal_retrieve_retry_interval
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Shouldn't duplicate addition to publication be a no-op?