Re: BUG #6041: Unlogged table was created bad in slave node

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar jun 07 08:16:01 -0400 2011:
>> Probably.  I guess the question is whether we want this to fail in (a)
>> the parser, (b) the planner, or (c) the executor.

> Really?  I thought it was the job of the parse analysis phase to figure
> out if table and column names are valid or not, and such.  If that's the
> case, wouldn't it make sense to disallow usage of a table that doesn't
> "exist" in a certain sense?

If you hope ever to support the proposed UNLOGGED-to-LOGGED or vice
versa table state changes, you don't want to be testing this in the
parser.  It has to be done at plan or execute time.

            regards, tom lane