On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 9:33 houzj.f...@fujitsu.com <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 2:18 PM Amit Langote <amitlangot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 12:15 PM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com > > <houzj.f...@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 10:47 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 7:21 AM houzj.f...@fujitsu.com wrote: > > > > > If we decide to disallow this case, we seem need to handle some > other > > > > > cases as well, for example: We might also need additional check > when > > > > > ATTACH a partition, because the partition's parent table could > already > > > > > be published in the same publication as the partition. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What kind of additional checks you are envisioning and why? > > > > > > For example: > > > > > > create table tbl1 (a int) partition by range (a); > > > create table tbl1_part1 (like tbl1); > > > create table tbl1_part2 partition of tbl1 for values from (10) to (20); > > > create publication pub for table > > > tbl1, tbl1_part1 with (publish_via_partition_root=false); > > > > > > --- We might need addition check here > > > Alter table tbl1 ATTACH partition tbl1_part1 for values from (1) to > (10); > > > > > > In the above cases, 'tbl1_part1' is not a partition of 'tb1' when > creating a > > > publication. After the ATTACH, 'tbl1_part1' would become a partition > of 'tbl1' > > > which seems the case we want to disallow(both parent and child table in > > > publication). So, When ATTACH, I thought we might need to check all > the parent > > > tables to see if any parent table is in the same publication which the > table to > > > be attached is also belongs to. Does it make sense ? > > > > I don't think creating or attaching a partition of a table that is > > present in a publish_via_partition_root=false actually adds the > > partition to pg_publication_rel, the base catalog. A partition's > > membership in the publication is implicit, unless of course you add it > > to the publication explicitly, like all the examples we have been > > discussing. I guess we're only arguing about the problems with the > > pg_publication_tables view, which does expand the partitioned table to > > show the partitions that are not otherwise not present in the base > > catalog. > > Maybe I didn't make it clear, I was trying to explain that it would be > complicated if we want to completely disallow specifying both child and > parent > table in the publication because of the ATTACH case I gave. In other > words, I > think it's fine to specify both child and parent table in the publication. Ah okay. I see your point. A table that was not once a partition would be in the catalog along with the unrelated parent table and if we were to enforce the rule that a parent and a partition cannot be in the catalog at the same time, we’d need to delete that table’s catalog record on ATTACHing it as a partition. Thanks. -- Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
