Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> This indicates that a toast record was present for that relation,
> despite:
> [ \d that looks like the table isn't wide enough for that ]
> I think we need to see pg_waldump output for the preceding records. That
> might allow us to see why there's a toast record that's being associated
> with this table, despite there not being a toast table.
I don't think you can make that conclusion. Perhaps the table once
needed a toast table because of some wide column that got dropped;
if so, it'd still have one. It'd be safer to look at
pg_class.reltoastrelid to verify existence (or not) of the toast relation.
It strikes me that there could easily be cases where a publisher table
has a toast relation and a subscriber's doesn't ... maybe this code
isn't expecting that?
regards, tom lane
