On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 10:21 AM Jacob Champion <jchamp...@timescale.com> wrote: > Some inheritance hierarchies won't be "partitioned" hierarchies, of > course, but the user can simply not set that replication option for > those publications.
The more I noodle around with this approach, the less I like it: it feels overly brittle, we have to deal with multiple inheritance somehow, and there seem to be many code paths that need to be partially duplicated. And my suggestion that the user could just opt out of problematic cases would be a bad user experience, since any non-partition inheritance hierarchies would just silently break. Instead... > (Alternatively, I can imagine a system where an > extension explicitly marks a table as having a different "publication > root", and then handling that marker with the existing replication > option. But that may be overengineering things.) ...I'm going to try this approach next, since it's opt-in and may be able to better use the existing code paths. --Jacob
