On 2019-03-25 09:04, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> So perhaps push the check down to GetRelationPublicationActions()
> instead. That way we don't have to patch up two places and everything
> "just works" even for possible other callers. See attached patch.
This has been committed and backpatched to
So perhaps push the check down to GetRelationPublicationActions()
instead. That way we don't have to patch up two places and everything
"just works" even for possible other callers. See attached patch.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Sup
At Thu, 14 Mar 2019 15:31:03 +0900, Amit Langote
wrote in
<26bfa053-3fb2-ad1d-efbb-7c930b41c...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> On 2019/03/14 15:03, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > Is it the right thing that GetRelationPublicationsActions sets
> > wrong rd_publicatons for the relations?
>
> Actually, after apply
On 2019/03/14 15:03, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> At Thu, 14 Mar 2019 11:30:12 +0900, Amit Langote
> wrote in
> <59e5a734-9e06-1035-385b-626717581...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
>> On 2019/03/13 21:03, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> If a FOR ALL TABLES publication exists, unlogged tables are ignored
>>> for publi
At Thu, 14 Mar 2019 11:30:12 +0900, Amit Langote
wrote in
<59e5a734-9e06-1035-385b-626717581...@lab.ntt.co.jp>
> On 2019/03/13 21:03, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > If a FOR ALL TABLES publication exists, unlogged tables are ignored
> > for publishing changes. But CheckCmdReplicaIdentity() would s
On 2019/03/13 21:03, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> If a FOR ALL TABLES publication exists, unlogged tables are ignored
> for publishing changes. But CheckCmdReplicaIdentity() would still
> check in that case that such a table has a replica identity set before
> accepting updates. That is useless, so
