Re: Question about behavior of deletes with REPLICA IDENTITY NOTHING
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Question about behavior of deletes with REPLICA IDENTITY NOTHING |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1KpbW+3eQDTN2mukUxDheeZ9D9qLsj_Ks63MpS8DiF5Ng@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Question about behavior of deletes with REPLICA IDENTITY NOTHING (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 9:57 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote: > > On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 13:40 +1100, Peter Smith wrote: > > - how to set the replica identity. If a table without a replica identity is > > + how to set the replica identity. If a table without a replica identity > > + (or with replica identity behavior the same as <literal>NOTHING</literal>) is > > added to a publication that replicates <command>UPDATE</command> > > or <command>DELETE</command> operations then > > subsequent <command>UPDATE</command> or <command>DELETE</command> > > I had the impression that the root of the confusion was the perceived difference > between "REPLICA IDENTITY NOTHING" and "no replica identity", and that change > doesn't improve that. > > How about: > > If a table without a replica identity (explicitly set to <literal>NOTHING</literal>, > or set to a primary key or index that doesn't exist) is added ... > Is it correct to say "set to a primary key or index that doesn't exist"? Because when it is set to the primary key then it should work. I think Peter's proposal along with Ashutosh's proposal is the simpler approach to clarify things in this area but I am fine if others find some other way of updating docs better. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: