Re: [BUG]Invalidate relcache when setting REPLICA IDENTITY

On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 12:42 PM tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com
<tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I think I found a bug related to logical replication(REPLICA IDENTITY in specific).
> If I change REPLICA IDENTITY after creating publication,  the DELETE/UPDATE operations won't be replicated as
expected.
>
> For example:
> -- publisher
> CREATE TABLE tbl(a int, b int);
> ALTER TABLE tbl ALTER COLUMN a SET NOT NULL;
> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_a ON tbl(a);
> ALTER TABLE tbl ALTER COLUMN b SET NOT NULL;
> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_b ON tbl(b);
> ALTER TABLE tbl REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX idx_a;
> CREATE PUBLICATION pub FOR TABLE tbl;
> ALTER TABLE tbl REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX idx_b;
> INSERT INTO tbl VALUES (1,1);
>
> -- subscriber
> CREATE TABLE tbl(a int, b int);
> ALTER TABLE tbl ALTER COLUMN b SET NOT NULL;
> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_b ON tbl(b);
> ALTER TABLE tbl REPLICA IDENTITY USING INDEX idx_b;
> CREATE SUBSCRIPTION sub CONNECTION 'dbname=postgres port=5432' PUBLICATION pub;
> SELECT * FROM tbl;
>
> -- publisher
> postgres=# UPDATE tbl SET a=-a;
> UPDATE 1
> postgres=# SELECT * FROM tbl;
> a  | b
> ----+---
>  -1 | 1
> (1 row)
>
> -- subscriber
> postgres=# SELECT * FROM tbl;
>  a | b
> ---+---
>  1 | 1
> (1 row)
>
> (a in subscriber should be -1)
>

I don't understand the purpose of idx_b in the above test case, why is
it required to reproduce the problem?

@@ -15488,6 +15488,7 @@ relation_mark_replica_identity(Relation rel,
char ri_type, Oid indexOid,
  CatalogTupleUpdate(pg_index, &pg_index_tuple->t_self, pg_index_tuple);
  InvokeObjectPostAlterHookArg(IndexRelationId, thisIndexOid, 0,
  InvalidOid, is_internal);
+ CacheInvalidateRelcache(rel);

CatalogTupleUpdate internally calls heap_update which calls
CacheInvalidateHeapTuple(), why is that not sufficient for
invalidation?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.