On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 3:25 PM Phil Florent <philflor...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > As an end-user, I am highly interested in the patch > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/42/3595/ but I don't fully get its main > goal in its first version. > It's "for all tables" that will be implemented ? > If one needs a complete replication of a cluster, a hot standby will always > be more efficient than a publication right ? I use both for different needs > in public hospitals I work for (hot standby for disaster recovery & logical > replication for dss) > The main interest of a publication is to be able to filter things on the > publisher and to add stuff on the replicated cluster. > If you compare PostgreSQL with less avanced RDBMS that don't really implement > schemas (typically Oracle), the huge advantage of Postgre is that many things > (e.g security) can be dynamically implemented via schemas. > Developers just have put a table in the "good" schema and that's all. Logical > DML replication now fully implements this logic since PostgreSQL 15. Only > remaining problem is that a "for tables in schema" publication has to be > owned by a superuser (because a normal user can have tables that don't belong > to him in a schema it owns ?) If DDL replication only works with "FOR ALL > TABLES " and not "FOR TABLES IN SCHEMA" it reduces its interest anyway. >
I don't see any major issue with supporting it for both "FOR ALL TABLES" and "FOR ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA". However, if we want to support it with the "FOR TABLE .." variant then we will probably need to apply some restrictions as we can only support 'alter' and 'drop'. Additionally, there could be some additional problems to deal with like say if the column list has been specified then we ideally shouldn't send those columns even in DDL. For example, if one uses Alter Table .. Rename Column and the new column name is not present in the published column list then we shouldn't send it. BTW, we have some proposals related to the specification of this feature in emails [1][2][3]. See, if you have any suggestions on the same? Note- It seems you have copied this thread to pgsql-general. Is it because you are not subscribed to pgsql-hackers? As this is a development project so better to keep the discussion on pgsql-hackers. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1%2B%2BY7a2SQq55DXT6neghZgj3j%2BpQ74%3D8zfT3k8Tkdj0ZA%40mail.gmail.com [2] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1KZqvJsTt7OkS8AkxOKVvSpkQkPwsqzNmo10mFaVAKeZg%40mail.gmail.com [3] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS0PR01MB571646874A3E165D93999A9D94889%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
