Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1w=bj5tsSh4PoATF7uPS_-NtE=AEG-SrvggD-ijXk9Pfw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
> If I create a publication "for all tables", \dRp+ doesn't indicate it is for
> all tables, it just gives a list of the tables.
>
> So it doesn't distinguish between a publication specified to be for all
> tables (which will be dynamic regarding future additions), and one which
> just happens to include all the table which currently exist.
>
> That seems unfortunate.  Should the "for all tables" be included as another
> column in \dRp and \dRp+, or at least as a footnote tag in \dRp+ ?
>

+1. I was thinking the same. Attached patch adds "All Tables" column
to both \dRp and \dRp+.


Looks good to me.  Attached with regression test expected output  changes.

Cheers,

Jeff 
Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] logical replication: \dRp+ and "for all tables"
Следующее
От: Noah Misch
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #14680: startup process on standby encounter a deadlock ofTwoPhaseStateLock when redo 2PC xlog